Volkswagen Bora 1999 vs Citroen Xsara 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 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: | 150 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 205 NM | 147 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
| Volkswagen Bora engine produces 40 HP more power than Citroen Xsara, whereas torque is 58 NM more than Citroen Xsara. Despite the higher power, Volkswagen Bora reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.0 | 6.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.1 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen Xsara is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Bora consumes 3.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Xsara, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Bora could require 465 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Bora consumes 2.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Xsara. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 54 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 770 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
| Citroen Xsara gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
|
Volkswagen Bora has 4x4: Vehicle is equipped with 4motion automatic four-wheel drive. Under normal driving conditions, the torque distribution is 90% to the front axle and 10% to the rear axle. When wheel spin is detected, the multi-plate clutch engages and torque is evenly distributed between the axles (50%/50%). | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Peugeot 307, 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 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Citroen Xsara 2000 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 2000 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.41 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Volkswagen Bora is larger. Volkswagen Bora is 4 cm longer than the Citroen Xsara, 4 cm wider, while the height of Volkswagen Bora is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 360 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1370 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Bora is 0.3 metres more than that of the Citroen Xsara. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`965 | 1`100 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.8/10 | 8.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Bora has
|
Citroen Xsara has
| |