Citroen Xsara 2003 vs Nissan Almera 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 98 HP | |
| Torque: | 147 NM | 136 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 13.1 seconds | |
|
Citroen Xsara is more dynamic to drive. Citroen Xsara engine produces 12 HP more power than Nissan Almera, whereas torque is 11 NM more than Nissan Almera. Thanks to more power Citroen Xsara reaches 100 km/h speed 3.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 6.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
By specification Citroen Xsara consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Almera, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen Xsara could require 45 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Citroen Xsara consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Almera. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 780 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 1090 km on highway | ||
| 730 km with real consumption | 810 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan Almera gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen C3, Peugeot 206, Peugeot 207 | 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 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Citroen Xsara 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 2003 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 2003 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.19 m | 4.20 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Citroen Xsara is smaller. Citroen Xsara is 1 cm shorter than the Nissan Almera, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Citroen Xsara is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 355 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1020 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Xsara is 0.3 metres more than that of the Nissan Almera. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`100 | 1`710 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Nissan Almera has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Citroen Xsara, so Nissan Almera quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Xsara has
|
Nissan Almera has
| |