Citroen Xsara 2000 vs Renault Kangoo 2003
| Body: | Hatchback | Minivan / MPV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 80 HP | |
| Torque: | 205 NM | 160 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.6 seconds | 14.1 seconds | |
|
Citroen Xsara is more dynamic to drive. Citroen Xsara engine produces 10 HP more power than Renault Kangoo, whereas torque is 45 NM more than Renault Kangoo. Thanks to more power Citroen Xsara reaches 100 km/h speed 2.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 5.7 | |
|
The Citroen Xsara is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Citroen Xsara consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Kangoo, which means that by driving the Citroen Xsara over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 870 km in combined cycle | |
| Citroen Xsara gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.19 m | 4.00 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.83 m | |
|
Citroen Xsara is larger, but lower. Citroen Xsara is 19 cm longer than the Renault Kangoo, 4 cm wider, while the height of Citroen Xsara is 43 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 650 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 2600 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Xsara is 0.1 metres less than that of the Renault Kangoo. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`100 | 1`660 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | low | |
| Citroen Xsara has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Kangoo has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Citroen Xsara, so Citroen Xsara quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Xsara has
|
| |