Citroen Xsara 2000 vs Audi A2 2004
| Body: | Coupe | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Citroen Xsara) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Audi A2) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 205 NM | 155 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.6 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Audi A2 is a more dynamic driving. Citroen Xsara engine produces 20 HP less power than Audi A2, but torque is 50 NM more than Audi A2. Due to the lower power, Citroen Xsara reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.9 l/100km | 6.8 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 Audi A2, 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 Audi A2. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 42 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 1280 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| 910 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: | 7 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Peugeot 206, Citroen C5, Peugeot 306 | 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. | |||
| 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
| |