Compare two cars
Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion
Marketing
Dimensons & Outlines
Engine
Performance (manual gearbox)
Performance (automatic gearbox)
Expenses
Virtual Adviser's™ opinion
Two significantly similar cars, no doubt about that. Still, each one has something different to offer. Having both cars powered by petrol engines and utilizing the 5-door suv body style within the same 'SUV' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (4 x 4 for the Nissan and front in the case of the Citroen). The first one has a Nissan-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 190hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 117hp engine designed by Mitsubishi.
SafetyThe fact that the Nissan got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, puts it sky-high safety-wise, in my eyes at least. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. Both vehicles belong to the suv segment, which is generally a very good thing safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. Furthermore, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the Japanese car offers a marginal difference of 6% more metal.
ReliabilityI don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Nissan does have a slight advantage, when all the models are taken into account. These are the results of an independent reasearch, while our visitors describe reliability of Nissan with an average rating of 4.3, and models under the Citroen badge with 4.1 out of 5. The same official information place Juke as average reliability-wise, and C4 Aircross is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as the Japanese car rank it on average as 5.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.5 out of 5.
Performance & Fuel economyNissan is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 2.9 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 200 kilometers per hour, 17km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the French car, averaging around 5.9 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (48 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 29% difference compared to the Japanese car.
Verdict
Nissan appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In my opinion, everything taken into account, the Japanese car beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. It all continues in the same direction, with Nissan being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but Nissan. Nevertheless, let's not forget that people have different preferences and needs, so what really counts is your personal feel. I'm only here to help. I suggest you spend two more minutes in order to find out which car, based on your needs and budget, would be picked by the virtual adviser™, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.