Citroen C-Crosser 2007 vs Nissan X-Trail 2007
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 156 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | 12.5 seconds | |
| Citroen C-Crosser engine produces 6 HP more power than Nissan X-Trail, whereas torque is 60 NM more than Nissan X-Trail. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 8.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.2 l/100km | 8.9 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen C-Crosser is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen C-Crosser consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail, which means that by driving the Citroen C-Crosser over 15,000 km in a year you can save 135 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen C-Crosser consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 730 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 174 mm (6.9 inches) | 200 mm (7.9 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Nissan X-Trail 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 | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mitsubishi Outlander, Peugeot 4007 | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Opel Vivaro | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan X-Trail might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Nissan X-Trail 2007 2.0 engine: The engine has a good power to fuel consumption ratio and, with careful maintenance, a long service life. The most common problems with these engines are with the fuel injection system and lubrication. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.65 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.68 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Citroen C-Crosser is 2 cm longer than the Nissan X-Trail, 3 cm wider, while the height of Citroen C-Crosser is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | no data | |
| Trunk capacity: | 184 litres | 479 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 184 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 441 litres | 479 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1686 litres | 1742 litres | |
| In 5-seat version Nissan X-Trail has more luggage space (by 38 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 56 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen C-Crosser is 1.2 metres more than that of the Nissan X-Trail, which means Citroen C-Crosser can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`410 | 2`170 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 5800 | 4200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen C-Crosser has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |