Citroen Xsara Picasso 2004 vs Ford C-Max 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 1.8 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 280 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.4 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
|
Ford C-Max is a more dynamic driving. Citroen Xsara Picasso engine produces 5 HP less power than Ford C-Max, whereas torque is 40 NM less than Ford C-Max. Due to the lower power, Citroen Xsara Picasso reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.9 | 5.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.1 l/100km | 6.2 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen Xsara Picasso is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen Xsara Picasso consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford C-Max, which means that by driving the Citroen Xsara Picasso over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen Xsara Picasso consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford C-Max. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1100 km in combined cycle | 1010 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km with real consumption | 880 km with real consumption | ||
| Citroen Xsara Picasso gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Peugeot 308, Citroen C3, Peugeot 407 | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Citroen Xsara Picasso might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Citroen Xsara 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.28 m | 4.33 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.64 m | 1.60 m | |
|
Citroen Xsara Picasso is smaller, but slightly higher. Citroen Xsara Picasso is 5 cm shorter than the Ford C-Max, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Citroen Xsara Picasso is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 550 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1620 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.5 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Xsara Picasso is 0.8 metres more than that of the Ford C-Max, which means Citroen Xsara Picasso can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`300 kg | 1`995 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Ford C-Max has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen Xsara Picasso has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Ford C-Max, so Ford C-Max quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Xsara Picasso has
|
Ford C-Max has
| |