DETAILED CAR COMPARISON

1995 Citroen XM vs 1995 Ford Aerostar Comparison

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

VS
WINNER

Ford Aerostar

Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points.

64.5–65.25
SPECIFICATION GROUPS

Every difference between the two cars

Basic Specifications

CitroenMakeFord
XMModelAerostar
1995Model year1995
HatchbackBody typeMinivan
5Seats5
5Doors4

Performance

9,7 s0–100 km/h—
222 km/hTop speed160 km/h
2963 ccEngine displacement2979 cc
167 HPPower147 HP
235 NmTorque224 Nm
6Cylinders6

Fuel & Consumption

PetrolFuel typePetrol
80 ltFuel tank79 lt
—Urban consumption16 lt
—Extra-urban consumption11 lt
10,8 ltAverage consumption—

Transmission & Chassis

Front-wheel driveDrivetrainRear-wheel drive
5Gears5
205/60 R15Tyre size205/75 R14
YesABSYes

Dimensions

4708 mmLength4440 mm
1794 mmWidth1820 mm
1389 mmHeight1850 mm
1470 KgWeight1530 Kg
2850 mmWheelbase3020 mm

E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note

1995 Citroen XM and 1995 Ford Aerostar 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, Ford Aerostar 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…