Renault Megane 2000 vs Citroen Xsara 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 200 NM | 147 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.6 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
|
Renault Megane is more dynamic to drive. Renault Megane engine produces 30 HP more power than Citroen Xsara, whereas torque is 53 NM more than Citroen Xsara. Thanks to more power Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 6.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.7 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen Xsara is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Megane consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Xsara, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Megane could require 105 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, 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: | 780 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 770 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Renault Laguna | 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: | 3.97 m | 4.19 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.40 m | |
| Renault Megane is 22 cm shorter than the Citroen Xsara, width is practically the same , while the height of Renault Megane is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 288 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`555 | 1`100 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Renault Megane has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen Xsara has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Renault Megane, so Renault Megane quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Citroen Xsara has
| |