BMW 3 series 2003 vs Citroen Xsara 2000

 
BMW 3 series
2003 - 2006
Citroen Xsara
2000 - 2003
Gearbox: ManualManual
Engine: 2.0 Petrol1.6 Petrol
Camshaft drive: Timing chainTiming belt
Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating.

Performance

Power: 143 HP110 HP
Torque: 200 NM147 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 9.3 seconds9.7 seconds
BMW 3 series is more dynamic to drive.
BMW 3 series engine produces 33 HP more power than Citroen Xsara, whereas torque is 53 NM more than Citroen Xsara. Thanks to more power BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds faster.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 7.46.9
Real fuel consumption: 8.3 l/100km7.4 l/100km
The Citroen Xsara is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
By specification BMW 3 series consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Xsara, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW 3 series could require 75 litres more fuel.
By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Xsara.
Fuel tank capacity: 63 litres54 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 850 km in combined cycle780 km in combined cycle
1100 km on highway980 km on highway
750 km with real consumption720 km with real consumption
BMW 3 series gets more mileage on one fuel tank.
Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy.

Drive type

Wheel drive type: Rear wheel drive (RWD)Front wheel drive (FWD)
Front-wheel drive cars (Citroen Xsara) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (BMW 3 series) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions.

Engines

Engine production duration: 6 years15 years
Engine spread: Used only for this carInstalled on at least 10 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen C3, Peugeot 206, Peugeot 207
In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Citroen Xsara might be a better choice in this respect.
Citroen Xsara 2000 1.6 engine: Relatively reliable engine, the main problems tend to be with the engine control electronics. The engine is demanding on fuel quality and fuel consumption is relatively high. It is highly recommended to ...  More about Citroen Xsara 2000 1.6 engine 

Dimensions

Length: 4.49 m4.19 m
Width: 1.76 m1.70 m
Height: 1.37 m1.40 m
BMW 3 series is larger, but slightly lower.
BMW 3 series is 30 cm longer than the Citroen Xsara, 6 cm wider, while the height of BMW 3 series is 3 cm lower.
Trunk capacity: 410 litresno data
Turning diameter: 10 meters10.7 meters
The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.7 metres less than that of the Citroen Xsara, which means BMW 3 series can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces.
Gross weight (kg): 1`8201`100
Safety: no data
Quality:
below average

average
Citroen Xsara has fewer problems.
According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Citroen Xsara, so Citroen Xsara quality is probably better
Average price (€): 42001000
Rating in user reviews: 8.2/10 8.4/10
Pros and Cons: BMW 3 sērija has
  • timing chain engine
  • more power
  • more full fuel tank mileage
  • better manoeuvrability
Citroen Xsara has
  • timing belt engine
  • lower fuel consumption
  • fewer faults
  • lower price
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv