Renault Scenic 2009 vs Citroen Xsara Picasso 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 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: | 130 HP | 95 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 135 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 15 seconds | |
|
Renault Scenic is more dynamic to drive. Renault Scenic engine produces 35 HP more power than Citroen Xsara Picasso, whereas torque is 55 NM more than Citroen Xsara Picasso. Thanks to more power Renault Scenic reaches 100 km/h speed 4.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 7.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.7 l/100km | 7.8 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen Xsara Picasso is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Renault Scenic consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Xsara Picasso, which means that by driving the Renault Scenic over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Renault Scenic consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Xsara Picasso. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 54 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 1030 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Renault Megane, Renault Grand Scenic | 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: | 4.24 m | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.64 m | 1.64 m | |
| Renault Scenic is 4 cm shorter than the Citroen Xsara Picasso, 10 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 437 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1837 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Scenic is 0.5 metres less than that of the Citroen Xsara Picasso, which means Renault Scenic can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`837 | 900 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 3400 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Scenic has
|
Citroen Xsara Picasso has
| |