Citroen Xsara 2000 vs Volkswagen Bora 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 2.3 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 | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 147 NM | 205 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 10 seconds | |
| Citroen Xsara engine produces 40 HP less power than Volkswagen Bora, whereas torque is 58 NM less than Volkswagen Bora. Despite less power, Citroen Xsara reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 10.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 10.1 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen Xsara is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen Xsara consumes 3.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Bora, which means that by driving the Citroen Xsara over 15,000 km in a year you can save 465 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen Xsara consumes 2.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Bora. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 780 km in combined cycle | 620 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 770 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Citroen Xsara gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Volkswagen Bora 1998: Vehicle is equipped with 4motion automatic four-wheel drive. Under normal driving conditions, the torque distribution is 90% to the front axle and 10% to the rear axle. When wheel spin is detected, the multi-plate clutch engages and torque is evenly distributed between the axles (50%/50%). | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen C3, Peugeot 206, Peugeot 207 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf | |
| 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. | |||
| Citroen Xsara 2000 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 2000 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.37 m | 4.41 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.47 m | |
|
Citroen Xsara is smaller. Citroen Xsara is 4 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Bora, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Citroen Xsara is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 360 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1370 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Xsara is 0.3 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Bora. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`100 | 1`965 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.4/10 | 7.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Xsara has
|
Volkswagen Bora has
| |