Citroen Xsara 2000 vs BMW 3 series 2003

 
Citroen Xsara
2000 - 2003
BMW 3 series
2003 - 2006
Gearbox: ManualManual
Engine: 1.6 Petrol2.0 Petrol
Camshaft drive: Timing beltTiming 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 HP143 HP
Torque: 147 NM200 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 9.7 seconds9.3 seconds
BMW 3 series is a more dynamic driving.
Citroen Xsara engine produces 33 HP less power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 53 NM less than BMW 3 series. Due to the lower power, Citroen Xsara reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds later.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 6.97.4
Real fuel consumption: 7.4 l/100km8.3 l/100km
The Citroen Xsara is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
By specification Citroen Xsara consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that by driving the Citroen Xsara over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel.
By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen Xsara consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series.
Fuel tank capacity: 54 litres63 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 780 km in combined cycle850 km in combined cycle
980 km on highway1100 km on highway
720 km with real consumption750 km with real consumption
BMW 3 series 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)Rear wheel drive (RWD)
Front-wheel drive cars (Citroen Xsara) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (BMW 3 series) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions.

Engines

Engine production duration: 15 years6 years
Engine spread: Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen C3, Peugeot 206, Peugeot 207Used only for this car
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: 4.19 m4.49 m
Width: 1.70 m1.76 m
Height: 1.40 m1.37 m
Citroen Xsara is smaller, but slightly higher.
Citroen Xsara is 30 cm shorter than the BMW 3 series, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Citroen Xsara is 3 cm higher.
Trunk capacity: no data410 litres
Turning diameter: 10.7 meters10 meters
The turning circle of the Citroen Xsara is 0.7 metres more than that of the BMW 3 series, which means Citroen Xsara can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces.
Gross weight (kg): 1`1001`820
Safety: no data
Quality:
average

below average
Citroen Xsara has fewer problems.
According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Citroen Xsara, so Citroen Xsara quality is probably better
Average price (€): 10004200
Rating in user reviews: 8.4/10 8.2/10
Pros and Cons: Citroen Xsara has
  • timing belt engine
  • lower fuel consumption
  • fewer faults
  • lower price
BMW 3 sērija has
  • timing chain engine
  • more power
  • more full fuel tank mileage
  • better manoeuvrability
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv