Citroen Xsara 1998 vs Ford Puma 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 103 HP | |
| Torque: | 135 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.1 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
Ford Puma is a more dynamic driving. Citroen Xsara engine produces 13 HP less power than Ford Puma, whereas torque is 10 NM less than Ford Puma. Due to the lower power, Citroen Xsara reaches 100 km/h speed 2.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 7.3 | |
|
The Ford Puma is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Citroen Xsara consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Puma, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen Xsara could require 60 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 40 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 540 km in combined cycle | |
| 870 km on highway | 660 km on highway | ||
| Citroen Xsara gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.17 m | 3.98 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.67 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.34 m | |
|
Citroen Xsara is larger. Citroen Xsara is 19 cm longer than the Ford Puma, 3 cm wider, while the height of Citroen Xsara is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Xsara is 0.7 metres more than that of the Ford Puma, which means Citroen Xsara can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`100 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Xsara has
|
Ford Puma has
| |