Citroen Xsara Picasso 2004 vs Ford Fusion 2005
| Body: | Minivan / MPV | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 95 HP | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 135 NM | 146 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
|
Ford Fusion is a more dynamic driving. Citroen Xsara Picasso engine produces 5 HP less power than Ford Fusion, whereas torque is 11 NM less than Ford Fusion. Due to the lower power, Citroen Xsara Picasso reaches 100 km/h speed 4.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.5 | 6.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Fusion is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen Xsara Picasso consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Fusion, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen Xsara Picasso could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen Xsara Picasso consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Fusion. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 840 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 650 km with real consumption | ||
| Citroen Xsara Picasso gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen Xsara, Citroen C3, Peugeot 206, Peugeot 207 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Ford C-Max, Ford Fiesta | |
| 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. | |||
| Citroen Xsara Picasso 2004 1.6 engine: Relatively reliable engine, the main problems tend to be with the engine control electronics. The engine is demanding on fuel quality and fuel consumption is relatively high. It is highly recommended to ... More about Citroen Xsara Picasso 2004 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.28 m | 4.02 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.64 m | 1.53 m | |
|
Citroen Xsara Picasso is larger. Citroen Xsara Picasso is 26 cm longer than the Ford Fusion, 3 cm wider, while the height of Citroen Xsara Picasso is 11 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 337 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1175 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.5 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Xsara Picasso is 1.2 metres more than that of the Ford Fusion, which means Citroen Xsara Picasso can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 900 | 1`605 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Average price (€): | 2200 | 2800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Xsara Picasso has
|
Ford Fusion has
| |