Subaru Outback 2017 vs Citroen Berlingo 2018
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 1.5 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Subaru Outback) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Citroen Berlingo) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 175 HP | 102 HP | |
| Torque: | 235 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 seconds | 13.8 seconds | |
|
Subaru Outback is more dynamic to drive. Subaru Outback engine produces 73 HP more power than Citroen Berlingo, but torque is 15 NM less than Citroen Berlingo. Thanks to more power Subaru Outback reaches 100 km/h speed 3.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 4.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 5.6 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen Berlingo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Subaru Outback consumes 3.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Berlingo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Subaru Outback could require 540 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Subaru Outback consumes 3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Berlingo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 1210 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 1280 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 890 km with real consumption | ||
| Citroen Berlingo 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: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 400'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Citroen Berlingo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Subaru Forester, Subaru Legacy | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Opel Corsa, Peugeot 308, Opel Combo, Peugeot 2008 | |
| 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 Berlingo 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.82 m | 4.40 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.92 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.84 m | |
| Subaru Outback is 42 cm longer than the Citroen Berlingo, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Subaru Outback is 17 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 512 litres | 597 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 597 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 512 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 2126 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Subaru Outback is 0.2 metres more than that of the Citroen Berlingo. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`100 | 2`080 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Subaru Outback scores higher in safety tests, but Citroen Berlingo is better rated in child safety tests. The Subaru Outback scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 25 200 | 15 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Subaru Outback has
|
Citroen Berlingo has
| |