Citroen C5 2010 vs Skoda Octavia 2004
Body: | Sedan | Hatchback | |
---|---|---|---|
The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
Engine: | 1.6 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: | 156 HP | 102 HP | |
Torque: | 240 NM | 148 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.7 seconds | 14.1 seconds | |
Citroen C5 is more dynamic to drive. Citroen C5 engine produces 54 HP more power than Skoda Octavia, whereas torque is 92 NM more than Skoda Octavia. Thanks to more power Citroen C5 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.3 | 7.8 | |
Real fuel consumption: | 9.0 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
The Skoda Octavia is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Citroen C5 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Octavia, which means that by driving the Citroen C5 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Citroen C5 consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Octavia. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 71 litres | 55 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 970 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
1260 km on highway | 940 km on highway | ||
780 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
Citroen C5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
Engine production duration: | 16 years | 11 years | |
Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Peugeot 308, Peugeot 207, Citroen C4 Picasso, Peugeot 3008 | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Polo, Seat Ibiza, Seat Toledo | |
In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Citroen C5 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Skoda Octavia 2004 1.6 engine: This is a simple and reliable engine with an impressive lifespan when properly maintained. However, many of its issues stem from air leaks, so checking hoses and the intake manifold is essential. The ignition ... More about Skoda Octavia 2004 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.78 m | 4.57 m | |
Width: | 1.86 m | 1.77 m | |
Height: | 1.45 m | 1.46 m | |
Citroen C5 is larger, but slightly lower. Citroen C5 is 21 cm longer than the Skoda Octavia, 9 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 439 litres | 560 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1350 litres | |
Skoda Octavia has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Citroen C5 has 121 litres less trunk space than the Skoda Octavia. This could mean that the Citroen C5 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
Turning diameter: | 11.7 meters | 10.2 meters | |
The turning circle of the Citroen C5 is 1.5 metres more than that of the Skoda Octavia, which means Citroen C5 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | 2`026 | 1`915 | |
Safety: | no data | ||
Quality: | below average | above average | |
Skoda Octavia has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen C5 has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Skoda Octavia, so Skoda Octavia quality is probably significantly better | |||
Average price (€): | 5000 | 2000 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Citroen C5 has
|
Skoda Octavia has
| |