2000 BMW M3 vs. 2010 Citroen C-Crosser
To start off, 2010 Citroen C-Crosser is newer by 10 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 BMW M3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 BMW M3 would be higher. At 3,168 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 BMW M3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 BMW M3 (325 HP @ 7750 RPM) has 157 more horse power than 2010 Citroen C-Crosser. (168 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 BMW M3 should accelerate faster than 2010 Citroen C-Crosser.
Because 2010 Citroen C-Crosser is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2000 BMW M3. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Citroen C-Crosser will offer significantly more control. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2000 BMW M3 (350 Nm @ 4900 RPM) has 118 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Citroen C-Crosser. (232 Nm @ 4100 RPM). This means 2000 BMW M3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Citroen C-Crosser.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 BMW M3 | 2010 Citroen C-Crosser | |
| Make | BMW | Citroen |
| Model | M3 | C-Crosser |
| Year Released | 2000 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Crossover |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3168 cc | 2359 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 325 HP | 168 HP |
| Engine RPM | 7750 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 350 Nm | 232 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4900 RPM | 4100 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 87 mm | 88 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 91 mm | 87 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.2:1 | 10.5:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
