Citroen Xsara 2000 vs Renault Megane 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 102 HP | |
| Torque: | 205 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.6 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
|
Renault Megane is a more dynamic driving. Citroen Xsara engine produces 12 HP less power than Renault Megane, but torque is 5 NM more than Renault Megane. Due to the lower power, Citroen Xsara reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 5.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.9 l/100km | 5.5 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Citroen Xsara consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen Xsara could require 30 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen Xsara consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 1150 km in combined cycle | |
| 1280 km on highway | 1360 km on highway | ||
| 910 km with real consumption | 1090 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Megane gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Peugeot 206, Citroen C5, Peugeot 306 | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volvo V40, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Volvo S40, Mitsubishi Carisma | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Megane 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. | |||
| Renault Megane 2000 1.9 engine: Long-lasting and fuel-efficient engine. Maintaining oil change and maintenance intervals is essential for a long engine life, as poor or untimely oil changes can result in turbine and oil pump damage, followed ... More about Renault Megane 2000 1.9 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.19 m | 3.97 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.37 m | |
| Citroen Xsara is 22 cm longer than the Renault Megane, width is practically the same , while the height of Citroen Xsara is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 288 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Xsara is 0.2 metres more than that of the Renault Megane. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`100 | 1`550 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | low | |
| Citroen Xsara has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Citroen Xsara, so Citroen Xsara quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Xsara has
|
Renault Megane has
| |