Citroen Xsara 2003 vs Skoda Octavia 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 250 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.5 seconds | 13.2 seconds | |
|
Citroen Xsara is more dynamic to drive. Citroen Xsara engine produces 20 HP more power than Skoda Octavia, whereas torque is 40 NM more than Skoda Octavia. Thanks to more power Citroen Xsara reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.2 | 5.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.7 l/100km | 5.4 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Octavia is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen Xsara consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Octavia, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen Xsara could require 30 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen Xsara consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Octavia. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1030 km in combined cycle | 1100 km in combined cycle | |
| 1280 km on highway | 1300 km on highway | ||
| 940 km with real consumption | 1010 km with real consumption | ||
| Skoda Octavia gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 610'000 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 Skoda Octavia engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Suzuki Grand Vitara, Citroen C5, Peugeot 607 | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Audi A3, Volkswagen Bora, Seat Leon | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Skoda Octavia might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.19 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.73 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.43 m | |
|
Citroen Xsara is smaller. Citroen Xsara is 32 cm shorter than the Skoda Octavia, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Citroen Xsara is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Xsara is 0.1 metres less than that of the Skoda Octavia. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`100 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Skoda Octavia has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Citroen Xsara, so Skoda Octavia quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Xsara has
|
Skoda Octavia has
| |