Citroen Nemo 2009 vs Opel Combo 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Diesel | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 68 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 160 NM | 290 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 18 seconds | 13.4 seconds | |
|
Opel Combo is a more dynamic driving. Citroen Nemo engine produces 37 HP less power than Opel Combo, whereas torque is 130 NM less than Opel Combo. Due to the lower power, Citroen Nemo reaches 100 km/h speed 4.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.5 | 5.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.4 l/100km | 6.7 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen Nemo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen Nemo consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Combo, which means that by driving the Citroen Nemo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 105 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen Nemo consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Combo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 1150 km in combined cycle | |
| 1180 km on highway | 1270 km on highway | ||
| 830 km with real consumption | 890 km with real consumption | ||
| Opel Combo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 370'000 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 Nemo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 2 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Fiat Bravo | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Opel Combo might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.96 m | 4.39 m | |
| Width: | 2.02 m | 1.83 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.85 m | |
| Citroen Nemo is 43 cm shorter than the Opel Combo, 19 cm wider, while the height of Citroen Nemo is 13 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 360 litres | 790 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 3200 litres | |
|
Opel Combo has more luggage space. Citroen Nemo has 430 litres less trunk space than the Opel Combo. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Nemo is 1.2 metres less than that of the Opel Combo, which means Citroen Nemo can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`700 | 2`010 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Opel Combo scores higher in safety tests. The Opel Combo scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 4400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Nemo has
|
Opel Combo has
| |