Citroen C3 Picasso 2009 vs Nissan Cube 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 95 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 135 NM | 153 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.9 seconds | 11.3 seconds | |
|
Nissan Cube is a more dynamic driving. Citroen C3 Picasso engine produces 15 HP less power than Nissan Cube, whereas torque is 18 NM less than Nissan Cube. Due to the lower power, Citroen C3 Picasso reaches 100 km/h speed 2.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 6.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
| By specification Citroen C3 Picasso consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Cube, which means that by driving the Citroen C3 Picasso over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 52 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 780 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 920 km on highway | ||
| 670 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 20 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Peugeot 308, Peugeot 207 | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Nissan Almera, Nissan Juke, Nissan Note, Nissan Micra | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Cube might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Citroen C3 Picasso engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| Nissan Cube 2010 1.6 engine: A simple and reliable engine, not particularly demanding on fuel quality. Tends to consume more oil, may have problems starting in cold weather. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.08 m | 3.98 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.67 m | 1.67 m | |
|
Citroen C3 Picasso is larger, but slightly lower. Citroen C3 Picasso is 10 cm longer than the Nissan Cube, 7 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 385 litres | 255 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1506 litres | 1563 litres | |
| Citroen C3 Picasso has 130 litres more trunk space than the Nissan Cube. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Cube (by 57 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen C3 Picasso is 0.4 metres more than that of the Nissan Cube, which means Citroen C3 Picasso can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Electric power steering | Hydraulic power steering | |
| Electric power steering is simpler, quieter, more fuel-efficient, more configurable and provides additional features such as auto-steering for lane assist and parking. The disadvantages of electric power steering are possible overheating under prolonged load conditions and insufficient feedback (feeling) during steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`747 | 1`700 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 3800 | 5600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen C3 Picasso has
|
Nissan Cube has
| |