Volvo S40 1999 vs Citroen Xsara 1998
| Body: | Sedan | Coupe | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 122 HP | 112 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 155 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 10.7 seconds | |
|
Volvo S40 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo S40 engine produces 10 HP more power than Citroen Xsara, whereas torque is 15 NM more than Citroen Xsara. Thanks to more power Volvo S40 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.2 | 8.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.8 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen Xsara is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Volvo S40 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Xsara, which means that by driving the Volvo S40 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, Volvo S40 consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Xsara. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 54 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 650 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 850 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 660 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo S40 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Volvo V40 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Peugeot 306, Citroen Xantia | |
| 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. | |||
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.17 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.40 m | |
|
Volvo S40 is larger. Volvo S40 is 31 cm longer than the Citroen Xsara, 2 cm wider, while the height of Volvo S40 is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 471 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
853 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo S40 is 0.3 metres more than that of the Citroen Xsara. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`750 | 1`100 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Volvo S40 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Citroen Xsara, so Volvo S40 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo S40 has
|
Citroen Xsara has
| |