2001 Citroen Xsara vs. 2012 Tata Nano
To start off, 2012 Tata Nano is newer by 11 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2001 Citroen Xsara. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2001 Citroen Xsara would be higher. At 1,997 cc (4 cylinders), 2001 Citroen Xsara is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2001 Citroen Xsara (106 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 71 more horse power than 2012 Tata Nano. (35 HP @ 5250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2001 Citroen Xsara should accelerate faster than 2012 Tata Nano. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2001 Citroen Xsara weights approximately 648 kg more than 2012 Tata Nano. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2012 Tata Nano is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2012 Tata Nano. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2001 Citroen Xsara, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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, 2001 Citroen Xsara (240 Nm @ 1750 RPM) has 192 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Tata Nano. (48 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2001 Citroen Xsara will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Tata Nano. 2001 Citroen Xsara has automatic transmission and 2012 Tata Nano has manual transmission. 2012 Tata Nano will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2001 Citroen Xsara will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
2001 Citroen Xsara | 2012 Tata Nano | |
Make | Citroen | Tata |
Model | Xsara | Nano |
Year Released | 2001 | 2012 |
Body Type | Hatchback | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Rear |
Engine Size | 1997 cc | 624 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 2 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 106 HP | 35 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5250 RPM |
Torque | 240 Nm | 48 Nm |
Torque RPM | 1750 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 85 mm | 73.5 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 88 mm | 73.5 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 18.0:1 | 9.5:1 |
Top Speed | 190 km/hour | 105 km/hour |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1248 kg | 600 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4190 mm | 3099 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1495 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1410 mm | 1652 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2550 mm | 2230 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 5.8 L/100km | 4.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 54 L | 37 L |