Rover 25 1999 vs Citroen C3 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 100 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 147 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.7 seconds | 10.7 seconds | |
| Rover 25 engine produces 10 HP less power than Citroen C3, but torque is 93 NM more than Citroen C3. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 | 6.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.0 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Rover 25 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Rover 25 consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C3, which means that by driving the Rover 25 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 210 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Rover 25 consumes 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 980 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 1210 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| 830 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
| Rover 25 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Honda Accord, Land Rover Freelander, Rover 45 | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen Xsara, 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 C3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Citroen C3 2002 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 C3 2002 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.99 m | 3.85 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.67 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.52 m | |
|
Rover 25 is larger, but lower. Rover 25 is 14 cm longer than the Citroen C3, 2 cm wider, while the height of Rover 25 is 10 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 304 litres | 305 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1086 litres | 1150 litres | |
| Rover 25 has 1 litres less trunk space than the Citroen C3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Citroen C3 (by 64 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Rover 25 is 0.5 metres less than that of the Citroen C3, which means Rover 25 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`600 | 1`525 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 25 has
|
Citroen C3 has
| |