Ford Puma 1997 vs Citroen Xsara 1998
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ford Puma is available only with manual gearbox, whereas Citroen Xsara has both automatic and manual transmission options. | |||
| Engines: | 1.4 - 1.7 (petrol) | 1.4 - 2.0 (petrol, diesel) | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 - 125 HP | 68 - 167 HP | |
| Torque: | 122 - 157 NM | 112 - 205 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.2 - 11.9 seconds | 8.7 - 17.2 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 - 7.4 | 5.2 - 9.4 | |
|
Ford Puma petrol engines consumes on average 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than Citroen Xsara. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.98 m | 4.17 m | |
| Width: | 1.67 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.34 m | 1.40 m | |
|
Ford Puma is smaller. Ford Puma is 19 cm shorter than the Citroen Xsara, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Puma is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Puma is 0.7 metres less than that of the Citroen Xsara, which means Ford Puma can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | ~ 1`100 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Puma has
|
Citroen Xsara has
| |