Renault Megane 2002 vs Citroen Xsara 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 152 NM | 147 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
| Renault Megane engine produces 5 HP more power than Citroen Xsara, whereas torque is 5 NM more than Citroen Xsara. Despite the higher power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.8 | 6.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km | |
|
By specification Renault Megane consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Xsara, which means that by driving the Renault Megane over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Renault Megane consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Xsara. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 54 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 880 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 1050 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 780 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Megane gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 26 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Renault Clio, Dacia Duster | 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Citroen Xsara 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 Megane 2002 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 Megane 2002 1.6 engine Citroen Xsara 2003 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 2003 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.21 m | 4.19 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.40 m | |
|
Renault Megane is larger. Renault Megane is 2 cm longer than the Citroen Xsara, 8 cm wider, while the height of Renault Megane is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 330 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1190 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.2 metres less than that of the Citroen Xsara. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`725 | 1`100 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Citroen Xsara has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Citroen Xsara, so Citroen Xsara quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Citroen Xsara has
| |