Citroen Xsara 2002 vs Audi A2 2004
| Body: | Coupe | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 137 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 155 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.6 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Citroen Xsara is more dynamic to drive. Citroen Xsara engine produces 27 HP more power than Audi A2, whereas torque is 35 NM more than Audi A2. Thanks to more power Citroen Xsara reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 6.8 l/100km | |
|
The Audi A2 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen Xsara consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi A2, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen Xsara could require 270 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen Xsara consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi A2. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 42 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| 660 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 300'000 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: | 11 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Peugeot 407, Peugeot 206, Citroen Xsara Picasso | 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
| |