Dacia Duster 2013 vs Citroen Xsara Picasso 2004
| Body: | Crossover / SUV | Minivan / MPV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 95 HP | |
| Torque: | 205 NM | 135 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 15 seconds | |
|
Dacia Duster is more dynamic to drive. Dacia Duster engine produces 30 HP more power than Citroen Xsara Picasso, whereas torque is 70 NM more than Citroen Xsara Picasso. Thanks to more power Dacia Duster reaches 100 km/h speed 3.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.3 | 7.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 7.8 l/100km | |
|
By specification Dacia Duster consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Xsara Picasso, which means that by driving the Dacia Duster over 15,000 km in a year you can save 180 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Dacia Duster consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Xsara Picasso. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 54 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 790 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 890 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 600 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Renault Scenic, Renault Megane, Dacia Dokker | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen Xsara, Citroen C3, Peugeot 206, Peugeot 207 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Citroen Xsara Picasso might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Citroen Xsara Picasso 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. | |||
| Citroen Xsara Picasso 2004 1.6 engine: Relatively reliable engine, the main problems tend to be with the engine control electronics. The engine is demanding on fuel quality and fuel consumption is relatively high. It is highly recommended to ... More about Citroen Xsara Picasso 2004 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.32 m | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.63 m | 1.64 m | |
|
Dacia Duster is larger, but slightly lower. Dacia Duster is 4 cm longer than the Citroen Xsara Picasso, 7 cm wider, while the height of Dacia Duster is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 473 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1636 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Dacia Duster is 1.1 metres less than that of the Citroen Xsara Picasso, which means Dacia Duster can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`752 | 900 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 6400 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Dacia Duster has
|
Citroen Xsara Picasso has
| |