Citroen Xantia 1993 vs Renault Megane 2000
| Body: | Hatchback | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 107 HP | |
| Torque: | 130 NM | 148 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.4 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Renault Megane is a more dynamic driving. Citroen Xantia engine produces 17 HP less power than Renault Megane, whereas torque is 18 NM less than Renault Megane. Due to the lower power, Citroen Xantia reaches 100 km/h speed 3.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.9 | 7.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen Xantia consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen Xantia could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen Xantia consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 880 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 840 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 420'000 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 Renault Megane engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 26 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Renault Clio, Dacia Duster | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Megane might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Renault Megane 2000 1.6 engine: The engine is very robust and long-lived, up to half a million kilometres, and can suffer minor damage, but overall it is quite reliable. Fuel consumption is relatively high for these engines, but they are not ... More about Renault Megane 2000 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.44 m | 4.44 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.38 m | 1.42 m | |
| Citroen Xantia and Renault Megane are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 510 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1310 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Xantia is 0.3 metres more than that of the Renault Megane. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`200 | 1`600 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | Renault Megane has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen Xantia has serious deffects in 75 percent more cases than Renault Megane, so Renault Megane quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Xantia has
|
Renault Megane has
| |