Renault Scenic 2006 vs Citroen Xsara Picasso 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| 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: | 150 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 205 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.4 seconds | 14.5 seconds | |
|
Renault Scenic is more dynamic to drive. Renault Scenic engine produces 60 HP more power than Citroen Xsara Picasso, whereas torque is 135 NM more than Citroen Xsara Picasso. Thanks to more power Renault Scenic reaches 100 km/h speed 5.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.8 l/100km | 6.3 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen Xsara Picasso is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Scenic consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Xsara Picasso, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Scenic could require 45 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Scenic consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Xsara Picasso. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 54 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1030 km in combined cycle | 980 km in combined cycle | |
| 1200 km on highway | 1170 km on highway | ||
| 880 km with real consumption | 850 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Opel Vivaro | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen Xsara, Peugeot 206, Citroen C5, Peugeot 306 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Scenic might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Renault Scenic 2006 2.0 engine: The engine has a good power to fuel consumption ratio and, with careful maintenance, a long service life. The most common problems with these engines are with the fuel injection system and lubrication. | |||
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): | 2`025 | 1`300 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Scenic has
|
Citroen Xsara Picasso has
| |