Suzuki Swift 2013 vs Citroen C3 2013
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.2 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: | 94 HP | 82 HP | |
| Torque: | 118 NM | 116 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.4 seconds | 12.3 seconds | |
| Suzuki Swift engine produces 12 HP more power than Citroen C3, whereas torque is 2 NM more than Citroen C3. Despite the higher power, Suzuki Swift reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 | 4.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.0 l/100km | 6.2 l/100km | |
|
By specification Suzuki Swift consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Suzuki Swift could require 150 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Suzuki Swift consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 40 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 1110 km in combined cycle | |
| 810 km on highway | 1280 km on highway | ||
| 660 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
| Citroen C3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 370'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Suzuki Baleno, Suzuki Ignis | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Peugeot 308, Citroen C1, Peugeot 2008, Opel Crossland | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Citroen C3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.85 m | 3.94 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.73 m | |
| Height: | 1.54 m | 1.52 m | |
|
Suzuki Swift is smaller, but slightly higher. Suzuki Swift is 9 cm shorter than the Citroen C3, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Suzuki Swift is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 211 litres | 300 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
528 litres | no data | |
|
Citroen C3 has more luggage space. Suzuki Swift has 89 litres less trunk space than the Citroen C3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki Swift is 0.2 metres more than that of the Citroen C3. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`560 | 1`511 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Suzuki Swift has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen C3 has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Suzuki Swift, so Suzuki Swift quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | no data | 8000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki Swift has
|
Citroen C3 has
| |