Citroen Xantia 1998 vs Volvo XC70 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.4 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 250 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.8 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC70 is a more dynamic driving. Citroen Xantia engine produces 53 HP less power than Volvo XC70, whereas torque is 90 NM less than Volvo XC70. Due to the lower power, Citroen Xantia reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.7 | 8.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.0 l/100km | 8.4 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen Xantia is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen Xantia consumes 2.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC70, which means that by driving the Citroen Xantia over 15,000 km in a year you can save 420 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen Xantia consumes 2.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC70. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1140 km in combined cycle | 820 km in combined cycle | |
| 1380 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 1080 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| Citroen Xantia gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Volvo XC70 2000: Automatic four-wheel drive with torque transfer to rear axle via viscous clutch when front wheels slip. Electronic traction control on front wheels (TRACS), which operates at speeds up to 40 km/h (25 mph) | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 560'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen Xsara, Suzuki Grand Vitara, Citroen C5, Peugeot 607 | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo XC90, Volvo C30 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo XC70 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.71 m | 4.73 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.86 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.56 m | |
|
Citroen Xantia is smaller. Citroen Xantia is 2 cm shorter than the Volvo XC70, 10 cm narrower, while the height of Citroen Xantia is 14 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 485 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1641 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Xantia is 0.2 metres less than that of the Volvo XC70. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`500 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | Volvo XC70 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen Xantia has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Volvo XC70, so Volvo XC70 quality is probably slightly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Xantia has
|
Volvo XC70 has
| |