Citroen Xsara 2001 vs Mazda 2 2010
| Body: | Coupe | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 95 HP | |
| Torque: | 250 NM | 205 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.3 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Citroen Xsara is more dynamic to drive. Citroen Xsara engine produces 15 HP more power than Mazda 2, whereas torque is 45 NM more than Mazda 2. Thanks to more power Citroen Xsara reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.2 | 4.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.8 l/100km | 5.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 2 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen Xsara consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen Xsara could require 150 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen Xsara consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 43 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1030 km in combined cycle | 1020 km in combined cycle | |
| 1280 km on highway | 1160 km on highway | ||
| 930 km with real consumption | 860 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 480'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Citroen Xsara engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Suzuki Grand Vitara, Citroen C5, Peugeot 607 | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.19 m | 3.90 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Citroen Xsara is larger, but lower. Citroen Xsara is 29 cm longer than the Mazda 2, width is practically the same , while the height of Citroen Xsara is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 249 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 787 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Xsara is 0.9 metres more than that of the Mazda 2, which means Citroen Xsara can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`100 | 1`540 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Mazda 2 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen Xsara has serious deffects in 510 percent more cases than Mazda 2, so Mazda 2 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 3600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Xsara has
|
Mazda 2 has
| |