Citroen C3 2002 vs Mitsubishi Colt 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.1 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 120 NM | 100 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.2 seconds | 13.4 seconds | |
| Citroen C3 and Mitsubishi Colt have the same engine power, but Citroen C3 torque is 20 NM more than Mitsubishi Colt. Citroen C3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.2 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 6.2 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen C3 consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen C3 could require 105 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen C3 consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Colt gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 300'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen Xsara, Peugeot 206, Citroen Berlingo | Used also on Smart ForFour | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Citroen C3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.85 m | 3.87 m | |
| Width: | 1.67 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.55 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Citroen C3 is 2 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Colt, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Citroen C3 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 305 litres | 500 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1150 litres | 760 litres | |
| Citroen C3 has 195 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Colt. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Citroen C3 (by 390 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen C3 is 0.3 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`470 | 1`450 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen C3 has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen C3 has
|
Mitsubishi Colt has
| |