Renault Scenic 2003 vs Citroen Xsara Picasso 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 95 HP | |
| Torque: | 152 NM | 135 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | 15 seconds | |
|
Renault Scenic is more dynamic to drive. Renault Scenic engine produces 20 HP more power than Citroen Xsara Picasso, whereas torque is 17 NM more than Citroen Xsara Picasso. Thanks to more power Renault Scenic reaches 100 km/h speed 2.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 7.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.2 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 0.3 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 45 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Renault Scenic consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Xsara Picasso. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 54 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 730 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Scenic gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 26 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Clio, Dacia Duster | 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. | |||
| 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. | |||
| Renault Scenic 2003 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 2003 1.6 engine 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: | 4.26 m | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.62 m | 1.64 m | |
| Renault Scenic is 2 cm shorter than the Citroen Xsara Picasso, 5 cm wider, while the height of Renault Scenic is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1840 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 11.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Scenic is 0.8 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`915 | 900 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Scenic has
|
Citroen Xsara Picasso has
| |