Citroen Xsara 2000 vs Volkswagen Polo 2001
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Citroen Xsara) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Volkswagen Polo) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 137 HP | 64 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 125 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.6 seconds | 17 seconds | |
|
Citroen Xsara is more dynamic to drive. Citroen Xsara engine produces 73 HP more power than Volkswagen Polo, whereas torque is 65 NM more than Volkswagen Polo. Thanks to more power Citroen Xsara reaches 100 km/h speed 8.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 4.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 5.0 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Polo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen Xsara consumes 3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen Xsara could require 450 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen Xsara consumes 3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 950 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 1150 km on highway | ||
| 670 km with real consumption | 900 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Polo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 700'000 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 Volkswagen Polo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Peugeot 407, Peugeot 206, Citroen Xsara Picasso | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Audi 80, Seat Toledo, Skoda Felicia | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Polo might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.19 m | 3.90 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.65 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Citroen Xsara is larger, but lower. Citroen Xsara is 29 cm longer than the Volkswagen Polo, 5 cm wider, while the height of Citroen Xsara is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 270 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1030 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Xsara is 0.1 metres more than that of the Volkswagen Polo. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`100 | 1`630 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Citroen Xsara has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Polo has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Citroen Xsara, so Citroen Xsara quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Xsara has
|
Volkswagen Polo has
| |