Citroen Nemo 2009 vs Renault Kangoo 2013
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 68 HP | 86 HP | |
| Torque: | 160 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 18 seconds | 13.3 seconds | |
|
Renault Kangoo is a more dynamic driving. Citroen Nemo engine produces 18 HP less power than Renault Kangoo, whereas torque is 40 NM less than Renault Kangoo. Due to the lower power, Citroen Nemo reaches 100 km/h speed 4.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.5 | 4.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.4 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen Nemo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen Nemo consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Kangoo, which means that by driving the Citroen Nemo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen Nemo consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Kangoo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 1300 km in combined cycle | |
| 1180 km on highway | 1420 km on highway | ||
| 830 km with real consumption | 1000 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Kangoo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 2 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 22 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster, Nissan Juke | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Kangoo might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Citroen Nemo 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. | |||
| Renault Kangoo 2013 1.5 engine: The engine has many modifications, is sufficiently common and spare parts are available. The fuel consumption/power ratio is good. The fuel injection system can be a problem and the timing belt change interval ... More about Renault Kangoo 2013 1.5 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.96 m | 4.21 m | |
| Width: | 2.02 m | 1.83 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.80 m | |
| Citroen Nemo is 25 cm shorter than the Renault Kangoo, 19 cm wider, while the height of Citroen Nemo is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 360 litres | 660 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 2600 litres | |
|
Renault Kangoo has more luggage space. Citroen Nemo has 300 litres less trunk space than the Renault Kangoo. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Nemo is 0.7 metres less than that of the Renault Kangoo, which means Citroen Nemo can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`700 | 1`954 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Renault Kangoo scores higher in safety tests. The Renault Kangoo scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 2600 | 9400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Nemo has
|
Renault Kangoo has
| |