BMW X3 2010 vs Citroen C-Crosser 2007
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 184 HP | 156 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
BMW X3 is more dynamic to drive. BMW X3 engine produces 28 HP more power than Citroen C-Crosser, the torque is the same for both cars. Thanks to more power BMW X3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The BMW X3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW X3 consumes 1.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C-Crosser, which means that by driving the BMW X3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 240 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW X3 consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C-Crosser. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 67 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1190 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 1260 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 900 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Ground clearance: | 212 mm (8.3 inches) | 174 mm (6.9 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, BMW X3 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 330'000 km | 480'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Citroen C-Crosser engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 17 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 1 sērija, BMW X1 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mitsubishi Outlander, Peugeot 4007 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW X3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.65 m | 4.65 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.66 m | 1.67 m | |
| BMW X3 and Citroen C-Crosser are practically the same length. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 184 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 184 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 550 litres | 441 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1600 litres | 1686 litres | |
| In 5-seat version BMW X3 has more luggage space (by 109 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Citroen C-Crosser (by 86 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.7 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW X3 is 0.3 metres less than that of the Citroen C-Crosser. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`300 | 2`410 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 13 000 | 6400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW X3 has
|
Citroen C-Crosser has
| |