Citroen Xsara 2000 vs Toyota Celica 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.8 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 (Toyota Celica) 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 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: | 90 HP | 143 HP | |
| Torque: | 205 NM | 172 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.6 seconds | 8.7 seconds | |
|
Toyota Celica is a more dynamic driving. Citroen Xsara engine produces 53 HP less power than Toyota Celica, but torque is 33 NM more than Toyota Celica. Due to the lower power, Citroen Xsara reaches 100 km/h speed 2.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 7.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.9 l/100km | 7.9 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen Xsara is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen Xsara consumes 2.3 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 345 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen Xsara consumes 2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 1280 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 910 km with real consumption | 690 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 | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Peugeot 206, Citroen C5, Peugeot 306 | 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. | |||
| 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. | |||
| 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
| |