DETAILED CAR COMPARISON

1996 Citroen XM vs 1996 Mazda Cronos Comparison

Compare technical specifications, scores and everyday-use differences side by side.

VS
WINNER

Mazda Cronos

Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points.

61.5–62.25
SPECIFICATION GROUPS

Every difference between the two cars

Basic Specifications

CitroenMakeMazda
XMModelCronos
1996Model year1996
HatchbackBody typeSedan
5Seats5
5Doors4

Performance

9,3 s0–100 km/h—
215 km/hTop speed192 km/h
1998 ccEngine displacement1991 cc
147 HPPower125 HP
235 NmTorque173 Nm
4Cylinders4

Fuel & Consumption

PetrolFuel typePetrol
80 ltFuel tank60 lt
14,5 ltUrban consumption—
8,0 ltExtra-urban consumption—
—Average consumption6,7 lt

Transmission & Chassis

Front-wheel driveDrivetrain4x4
5Gears5
205/60 R15Tyre size195/65 R14 89 H
YesABSYes

Dimensions

4708 mmLength4695 mm
1794 mmWidth1770 mm
1394 mmHeight1400 mm
1401 KgWeight1260 Kg
2850 mmWheelbase2610 mm

E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note

1996 Citroen XM and 1996 Mazda Cronos approach the same decision from different angles. We compare the exact versions so changes in engine, transmission, dimensions and equipment are not hidden behind the model names.

Overall, Mazda Cronos leads the E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points. The score provides a consistent summary, while the best choice can still change with priorities such as urban efficiency, luggage space, performance or equipment.

SIMILAR COMPARISONS

Similar comparisons

Explore related comparisons featuring cars from this matchup.

Comments are loading…