Citroen Xsara 2000 vs Volkswagen Golf 1998
| Body: | Coupe | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 147 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
|
Citroen Xsara is more dynamic to drive. Citroen Xsara engine produces 10 HP more power than Volkswagen Golf, whereas torque is 2 NM more than Volkswagen Golf. Thanks to more power Citroen Xsara reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 7.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 8.0 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 Volkswagen Golf, 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 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Golf. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 780 km in combined cycle | 740 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 680 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 | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen C3, Peugeot 206, Peugeot 207 | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volkswagen Polo, Skoda Octavia, Seat Ibiza, Seat Toledo | |
| 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 Volkswagen Golf 1998 1.6 engine: This is a simple and reliable engine with an impressive lifespan when properly maintained. However, many of its issues stem from air leaks, so checking hoses and the intake manifold is essential. The ignition ... More about Volkswagen Golf 1998 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.19 m | 4.15 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.44 m | |
| Citroen Xsara is 4 cm longer than the Volkswagen Golf, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Citroen Xsara is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Xsara is 0.2 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Golf. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`100 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Volkswagen Golf has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen Xsara has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Volkswagen Golf, so Volkswagen Golf quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.4/10 | 7.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Xsara has
|
Volkswagen Golf has
| |