Citroen Xsara 2000 vs Audi A2 2004
| Body: | Coupe | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 147 NM | 155 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
| Citroen Xsara and Audi A2 have the same engine power, but Citroen Xsara torque is 8 NM less than Audi A2. Citroen Xsara reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 6.8 l/100km | |
|
The Audi A2 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen Xsara consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi A2, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen Xsara could require 150 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen Xsara consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi A2. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 42 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 780 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 890 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 4 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 Golf, Volkswagen Bora | |
| 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 Audi A2 2004 1.6 engine: The intake system in this engine is highly complex, with numerous sensors prone to malfunctions. The only effective solution is to replace them when issues arise. This engine is also highly sensitive to ... More about Audi A2 2004 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.19 m | 3.83 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.67 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.55 m | |
|
Citroen Xsara is larger, but lower. Citroen Xsara is 36 cm longer than the Audi A2, 3 cm wider, while the height of Citroen Xsara is 15 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 390 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1085 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Xsara is 0.4 metres more than that of the Audi A2. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`100 kg | 1`510 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Audi A2 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Citroen Xsara, so Audi A2 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 2400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.4/10 | 8.5/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Xsara has
|
Audi A2 has
| |