Citroen Xsara 2003 vs Toyota RAV4 2003
| Body: | Estate car / wagon | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.8 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 | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 147 NM | 161 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 12.2 seconds | |
| Citroen Xsara engine produces 15 HP less power than Toyota RAV4, whereas torque is 14 NM less than Toyota RAV4. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 7.4 | |
| Citroen Xsara consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota RAV4, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen Xsara could require 30 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 57 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen C3, Peugeot 206, Peugeot 207 | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Corolla, Toyota Corolla Verso | |
| 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 Toyota RAV4 2003 1.8 engine: The 1ZZ-FE engine is more advanced, lighter, and simpler than its predecessor, emphasizing fuel efficiency and output. However, these improvements have come at the cost of reduced durability compared to earlier cast-iron engines. The engine block features an open-deck cooling design for easier production and lower ... More about Toyota RAV4 2003 1.8 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.37 m | 4.26 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.70 m | |
| Citroen Xsara is 11 cm longer than the Toyota RAV4, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Citroen Xsara is 28 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 400 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1150 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 Toyota RAV4. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`000 | 1`730 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Toyota RAV4 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen Xsara has serious deffects in 60 percent more cases than Toyota RAV4, so Toyota RAV4 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 3200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Xsara has
|
Toyota RAV4 has
| |