Renault Scenic 2009 vs Citroen C3 Picasso 2009
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 151 NM | 160 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 11.7 seconds | |
| Renault Scenic engine produces 10 HP less power than Citroen C3 Picasso, whereas torque is 9 NM less than Citroen C3 Picasso. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 | 6.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 7.8 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen C3 Picasso is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Scenic consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C3 Picasso, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Scenic could require 150 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Scenic consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C3 Picasso. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 26 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Clio, Dacia Duster | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Citroen C5, Citroen C4 Picasso, Peugeot 3008, Peugeot 2008, Citroen C4 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Citroen C3 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. | |||
| Renault Scenic 2009 1.6 engine: The engine is very robust and long-lived, up to half a million kilometres, and can suffer minor damage, but overall it is quite reliable. Fuel consumption is relatively high for these engines, but they are not ... More about Renault Scenic 2009 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.24 m | 4.08 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.64 m | 1.67 m | |
|
Renault Scenic is larger, but slightly lower. Renault Scenic is 17 cm longer than the Citroen C3 Picasso, 8 cm wider, while the height of Renault Scenic is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 437 litres | 385 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1837 litres | 1506 litres | |
|
Renault Scenic has more luggage capacity. Renault Scenic has 52 litres more trunk space than the Citroen C3 Picasso. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Scenic (by 331 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Scenic is 0.4 metres more than that of the Citroen C3 Picasso, which means Renault Scenic can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`877 | 1`753 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Renault Scenic has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen C3 Picasso has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Renault Scenic, so Renault Scenic quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3000 | 3600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Scenic has
|
Citroen C3 Picasso has
| |