Volkswagen T-Cross vs Citroën C3 Aircross vs Ford EcoSport: which one is the best value for money?

Kudos to Ford for fielding one of the earliest contestants in the compact crossover wars. Their EcoSport became a solid hit in this category, and helped to ease the transition from our sedan-focused history into the high-riding future. But leadership positions will always be challenged, and there are some very appealing newcomers jostling for their slice of the pie. We pitched the EcoSport against the new VW T-Cross and Citroën C3 Aircross, to see which one offers the best value for money.

Martin Pretorius

12 Dec 2019 · 23:44Automotive News

1 / 19

Urban warriors with a sense of fashion

If we’re completely honest with ourselves, the compact crossover really is a great solution to the motoring needs of many South Africans. A large percentage of us do most of our driving in the city or on urban freeways, where an elevated seating position becomes a big positive, while the slightly increased ground clearance these machines usually offer makes short work of potholes and speed humps.

As a result, we’ve witnessed the decimation of the small sedan market segment, with a host of urban-biased soft-roaders seamlessly slotting into that space. Practicality and styling are other drawcards for crossover buyers, because they’re usually even more versatile than similarly-sized traditional body formats, but project a far more outdoorsy image.

Ford hopped onto this bandwagon quite soon after the craze started, and created a really enticing little crossover with their EcoSport. High-riding stance mixed with cute looks and a healthy serving of space, and the end result was a roaring success for the brand with the blue oval. But success attracts success, and we’re currently witnessing a massive influx of new faux-by-fours, all aimed at those same buyers. The EcoSport is suddenly starting to show its age, even after a fairly extensive facelift in 2018.

One of the biggest threats to the EcoSport’s market share comes from Volkswagen. They’ve been making SUVs for a while, actually, but it took them a good while to scale their products down to urban-warrior dimensions. It was worth the wait, though, because the new T-Cross is a cracking car – it’s almost like Volkswagen decided to see what the other manufacturers were doing, before hitting back with an opponent which matches (or beats) its opponents in just about every metric.

Meanwhile, in a country right next door, Citroën has taken their second stab at this market segment. Their previous entry in this class, the C4 Cactus, wasn’t a hit in South Africa, so it was quietly dropped from our market. More’s the pity, because it was one of the very few unique offerings in a very same-same class. Can its local successor, the new C3 Aircross, make more of an impression in a very crowded marketplace, and how does it compare to the old-stager Ford and the glittering new Volkswagen?

We decided to choose the least-expensive petrol-powered, automatic variant of each model (the only gearbox you can get in a T-Cross or an Aircross). And, in spite of the lifestyle ambitions and butched-up styling on display, they’re all front-wheel driven, so off-road capability is no priority at all. But, before we find out how they stack up, let’s get the key numbers out of the way.

Facts and figures:

	Volkswagen T-Cross 1.0TSI Comfortline	Citroën C3 Aircross 1.2T Feel	Ford EcoSport 1.0T Trend Auto
Engine size (cyl/size)	3-cyl, 1.0-litre turbopetrol	3-cyl, 1.2-litre turbopetrol	3-cyl, 1.0-litre turbopetrol
Power/Torque	85 kW/200 Nm	81 kW/205 Nm	92 kW/170 Nm
Kerb Weight	1160 kg	1188 kg	1336 kg
Length (mm)	4 235	4 154	4 325
Airbag count	6	6	7
Load Volume *	377 litres	410 litres	333
Top Speed (km/h) **	193	184	181
Ave Consumption **	5.3 ℓ/100 km	5.1 ℓ/100 km	6.3 ℓ/100 km
Warranty	3 yr/120 000 km	5 yr/100 000 km	4 yr/120 000 km
Price	R 334 600	R 331 900	R 321 600

*With 5 seats in use

**Manufacturer's official claimed figures.

Analysis

Power, performance, and drivetrains

Downsizing is the name of the game here, with all three cars powered by trembling turbocharged triples. That bit about trembling is not strictly true, though, because all three engines are remarkably smooth-running for their type. Of the three, the Citroën’s 1.2-litre (shared with some Peugeots and Opels) is slightly the roughest-running, but it’s still well within the realm of acceptable smoothness. The Volkswagen’s engine is undoubtedly more refined, relegating the Ford to a mid-pack finish.

Peak power outputs are fairly closely matched, with the Citroën opening the gambit with 81 kW, the T-Cross raising the stakes to 85 kW, and the EcoSport offering 92 kW. The pecking order is reversed where maximum torque is concerned, though, because the C3’s larger engine bringing 205 Nm to the party, against the Volkswagen’s 200 Nm. Seen in this company, the Ford’s 170 Nm seems surprisingly paltry, but that’s likely more as a result of tuning than due to any inherent engine characteristic.

Swinging matters in the Volkswagen’s favour is its sharp-shifting 7-speed twin-clutch gearbox, in contrast to the 6-speed torque converter automatics in the other two. Even though the Citroën (barely) has the most torque here, that advantage is quickly erased by a transmission which prioritises unobtrusive progress over sheer performance. The Ford has the same drawback, but with less torque, so its progress will be the least spritely here.

The Ford falls even further from the performance benchmarks due to its weight, because it’s by far the heaviest of this trio (176 kg heavier than the Volkswagen and 148 kg heavier than the Citroën). So, even though it has the most power here, its power-to-weight ratio of 68.9 kW/ton is overmatched by the 73.3 kW/ton on offer in the T-Cross, and barely betters the 68.2 kW/ton you’ll get with the Aircross.

Claimed performance figures confirm the Volkswagen’s performance superiority, with a 0 – 100 km/h sprint dispatched in 10.2 seconds, against the 10.7 seconds of the Citroën. The EcoSport is the slowest here (and thus ends up in the last place, performance-wise). Its claimed sprint time of 12.7 seconds and the lowest top speed of 181 km/h (184 km/h for the Aircross and 193 km/h in the T-Cross), results in a performance pecking order which puts the Volkswagen first, the Citroën second, and the Ford third.

Economy

Fuel efficiency nets the EcoSport another third place, with a claimed average consumption figure of 6.3 ℓ/100 km. This is a full 1.0 ℓ/100 km more than the T-Cross’s claimed figure, while the winning Aircross beats the second-placed VW’s number by another 0.2 ℓ/100 km.

These are all highly theoretical, of course, as it’s unlikely that any one of them will return better than 6.0 ℓ/100 km in the real world – and possibly more than 7.0 ℓ/100 km in some usage patterns. Expect mid-6.0 ℓ/100 km figures for all three under similar driving conditions – those squared-off lines and tall anatomies have to exact a toll at the fuel pumps, either way.

Practicality

Let’s have a round of applause for the C3 Aircross in this department, because there’s some packaging witchcraft at play here: within the shortest overall length, the engineers managed to eke out enough room for a 410 litre luggage compartment as well as a reasonable amount of cabin space. This trounces the T-Cross’s 377 litres, and far eclipses the 333 litres on offer in the back of the EcoSport.

To the Ford’s credit, its tall build gives the EcoSport very competitive cabin room, with enough leg-and headroom to accommodate a quartet of 6-footers. The T-Cross struggles a bit in this department, because its lower roofline eats into headroom. Nonetheless, its more-capacious boot gives the Volkswagen the second position here, behind the spacious Citroën but ahead of the constrained Ford.

Equipment and safety

Considering the fact that these three are the entry-level variants in their respective ranges, and given their price class, these cars are remarkably well-equipped. Common across them all are alloy wheels, air-con, power steering with leather steering wheels, cruise control, rear parking sensors, and colour touchscreen infotainment systems, although the Ford and the Citroën are the only ones to offer smartphone mirroring as standard (it’s optional for the VW).

The Ford is the only one to have standard navigation, although the Volkswagen stages a strong comeback with automatic wiper- and headlight controls and front parking sensors. Let’s call first place in the toy count a draw between the Ford and the Volkswagen, then, with the Citroën following them very closely.

On the safety front, all the usual electronic systems are present on all three cars: ABS, stability control, ISOFIX child seat anchors, and at least 6 airbags are standard equipment on them all. In fact, the EcoSport has 7 airbags (it gets a driver’s knee airbag extra), but even this advantage cannot hand it the safety honours.

The reason for this lies in their respective Euro-NCAP crash test results, where the C3 Aircross and T-Cross both scored 5 stars as opposed to the EcoSport’s 4 star rating. This is likely as a result of the EcoSport’s age, as well as a relative lack of the latest safety aids: it doesn’t have any automatic emergency braking functionality (optional for the tested Aircross, and standard on the T-Cross). This last point hands the T-Cross the safety crown, relegates the C3 Aircross to second place, and leaves the ageing EcoSport in third place.

Verdict

Too many last places in this company forces the Ford EcoSport into the third overall position: it has the smallest boot, drinks the most, lags a bit on safety, and has the laziest performance of this trio. It’s still a very useful car in isolation, but in the face of such talented newcomers, being good enough isn’t good enough anymore. Its main redeeming qualities are a very strong warranty (the best in this group at 4 years/120 000 km), the second-best service plan (4 years/60 000 km), and lowest price (R 13 000 less than the VW and R 10 300 less than the Citroën). Is that saving worth the downsides? Many buyers still think so, but its star isn't shining quite as brightly anymore.

The Citroën C3 Aircross ends up in second place, in spite of class-leading practicality and the best warranty/service plan combination (both of which run for 5 years/100 000 km). Its main problem lies with its price, because it’s the second-most expensive car here, while lacking in some features. Resale value is also a bit of a worry, as Citroëns historically suffer from pretty poor value retention.

This leaves the Volkswagen T-Cross to scoop up the value win here. It has the strongest safety credentials, a good mix of features for the price, the strongest performance, and excellent real-life fuel efficiency. The only areas where it has a middling finish are in the warranty- and service plan departments (3 years/100 000 km and 3 years/45 000 km, respectively) and ultimate practicality. But, considering its other strengths, there’s enough appeal to seriously challenge the established players in this field. It's even worth its price premium, just on standard features. Johnny-come-lately certainly did his homework before joining this class…