Citroen Xsara 2001 vs Toyota Celica 1999
| 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 | 143 HP | |
| Torque: | 147 NM | 172 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 8.7 seconds | |
| Citroen Xsara engine produces 33 HP less power than Toyota Celica, whereas torque is 25 NM less than Toyota Celica. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 7.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.2 l/100km | 7.9 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Celica is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Citroen Xsara consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica, which means that by driving the Citroen Xsara over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Citroen Xsara consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 580 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
| 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 RAV4, 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 2001 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 2001 1.6 engine Toyota Celica 1999 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 Celica 1999 1.8 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.19 m | 4.34 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.32 m | |
|
Citroen Xsara is smaller, but higher. Citroen Xsara is 15 cm shorter than the Toyota Celica, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Citroen Xsara is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Xsara is 0.3 metres more than that of the Toyota Celica. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`100 | 1`200 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Xsara has
|
Toyota Celica has
| |