Volkswagen T-ROC vs Citroen C3 Aircross

What's the difference?

So that’s the T-Roc, a bit of Euro style that’s still priced to take the fight to some small SUVs from Japan or Korea.

Is it the cheapest style-forward small SUV you can get? No, but it’s far from the expensive end of things.

Plus, if you can resist ticking some option boxes, it beats some value-focused rivals and looks good doing it.

If the feeling of a sturdy fit-out and a confidence inspiring drive is important to you, I reckon the T-Roc should be an entry on your shopping list.

It's a good car, no question. Individuality is key to Citroen's brand appeal and you get that, too. A comfortable cabin, plush ride and hot damn, it's way too expensive, which is a crying shame. You could argue - as Citroen's product planners probably have - that it doesn't help to offer one in the mid-$20K mark because it won't make much money because so few people will buy it. Drop it at a premium, only lose a few opportunistic buyers but make more money per unit with committed fans? Why not, I guess?

Like most French cars, I'm glad it exists for weird French car fans like me to consider.

The T-Roc subtly stands out without being garish, avoiding becoming part of the highway or suburban camouflage without relying on extreme design decisions.

For example, the LED daytime running lights that wrap around the shapes below the LED 'I.Q' headlights where vents would otherwise be on the R performance variant are quite cute.

In fact, the whole front end of this small SUV has a friendly look, even if there’s nothing specific that’s particularly exciting about it.

This 'Petroleum Blue Metallic' colour is a $700 option, but anything other than white costs extra.

However, the black roof two-tone look is a standard for the Style, as are the black mirror caps and its 18-inch alloys.

There are roof rails up top, tinted privacy windows for rear passengers and for the rear window and a sloping roofline at the rear that adds a touch of ‘sport’ to the silhouette along with a small spoiler at the top.

As you might imagine, it's an individual design. Lots of Cactus cues, like the roof rails, bluff front end and stacked headlights Hyundai, uh, appropriated for the Kona. Curiously, no 'airbumps' along the side despite the C3 hatch having them...

The 17-inch wheels somehow look tiddly given the airspace over the wheels and I can report that black is not really this car's colour, even with the contrasting white roof and weird Mazda 121 Shades special edition venetian blind treatment on the quarter window. Bit of an '80s throwback there for you.

Lots more Cactus inside though, starting with the brilliant front seats, squared-off steering wheel and funky air vents. The little tray on top of the glove box is good, but it isn't rubber-lined, so that's annoying.

The Top Gun handbrake is hilarious but apart from the texturing of the fabric on the seats, it's a tad dark below the windowline. 

Inside the T-Roc is a bit of an interesting dichotomy.

Some of what’s in here is ‘old-gen’ Volkswagen stuff, but it still holds up today against even some recently introduced models.

The dichotomy is that while it’s very usable and slick, some of its materials and surfaces let it down a touch.

The good points are that the cabin tech is a perfect level of physical and digital. The buttons and controls are easy to use and feel solid and even though the climate controls could be more physical, they’re still good as far as touch panel style controls go.

The older VW gear is arguably better than a lot of what’s found in newer models where some use of touchscreens and haptic panels has drawn negative feedback from customers.

The multimedia software managed via the 8.0-inch touchscreen is more simple and sensible than the new version, plus the Digital Cockpit Pro display for the driver is clear and, importantly, customisable. It’s a similar cockpit system that used to seem quite impressive in high-end Audis.

But what doesn’t feel very high-end is some of the plastic and the decisions around function in the rest of the space.

The leather on the seats is not a cheap option box to tick at $3450, but it feels a little cheap to the touch. It’s a tad hard and even has a bit of a rough look to it.

That option also makes them heated and electrically adjustable, though, which is welcome in winter. Otherwise, cloth seats without the optional leather or heating would be absolutely fine, and that means you get a storage space under them, too.

This central space between the driver and front passenger, too, is a little awkward with the cupholder placement. It’s behind the shifter meaning a tall bottle will be in the way and it’s got slightly odd sizing for bottles or cups with nothing to stop them wobbling.

I am, however, a fan of the angled-away phone slot under the climate controls to minimise phone screen visibility (and distraction) and the traditional shifter itself is welcome.

Look up, and (in our test car) there’s an optional ($2000) panoramic sunroof there. It’s yours if you want it, and it does have an electric blind, but some Japanese and Korean cars at this price point get that as standard.

An average-sized adult will find the second row is spacious enough and relatively comfortable. There’s an armrest, dual-directional vents and two USB-C ports.

Behind that, boot space is generous at 445L with the seats up thanks to an adjustable floor, which is very useful for tall items and even manages to fit a space saver spare tyre under it.

It’s a total of 1290L with the split-fold seats down, too, though they’re not super flat with the adjustable floor down.

Even for a little car, the Aircross could do better. The lack of a proper cupholder provision for the car - a solitary spot at the rear of the centre console - is mildly baffling until you remember that this car is from France. The French hate a cupholder but, obviously, you can fit wine bottles in the doors.

It's worth repeating just how comfortable and supportive the front seats are on any given journey. Broad but supportive and somehow perfectly sprung, I would cheerfully rip out most other front seats and replace them with these.

The rear seats are less of these things and anyone who forces anyone to use the middle seat should be ashamed of themselves. The headroom is good back there, though.

The boot is a big one for the size of the car, swallowing 410 litres and expanding to 1289 litres with both rear seat sections folded.

A perennial Citroen problem is the price - at $32,990, the tiny SUV is doing battle with cars that are really a size up, coming in closer in size to the Venue than, say, the ASX.

That Yaris Hybrid price (we're all still reeling from that number) scores you a 17-inch alloys, a six-speaker stereo, climate control, front camera, reversing camera, keyless entry and start, front and rear parking sensors, cruise control, sat nav, halogen headlights (yep, you read that right), head-up display, leather wheel and shifter, auto parking, auto wipers and headlights, wireless charging pad and a space-saver spare.

The central touchscreen is annoying in that there are almost no hardware switches for functions like climate control. The software is a bit on the slow side, too, but you do get Android Auto and Apple CarPlay. The stereo is fine.

The engine in the T-Roc - as with most Volkswagens - does what it says on the tin. Essentially, a 110TSI means there’s 110kW of turbocharged VW happening, in this case a 1.4-litre four-cylinder that also makes 250Nm of torque.

It’s paired to an eight-speed torque converter, which will be music to the ears of those who have been scorned by older VW dual-clutches.

It drives the front wheels only, and there’s no hybridisation or 48-volt system.

One of the great engines in mass-produced road cars today has found its way under the bonnet of the Aircross. Peugeot-Citroen's 1.2-litre three-cylinder turbo is a cracking engine, serving up 81kW/205Nm through a six-speed Aisin-sourced auto to the front wheels.

While the 11.8-second dash to 100km/h is, uh, leisurely, the torque figure means that on the move it's not as sluggish as that number or its 1200kg kerb weight would suggest.

A lack of electrification in a relatively small engine and a traditional drivetrain shouldn't scare you too much, in this case.

Combined cycle fuel consumption is a claimed 6.3L/100km. On test in mostly urban areas or for spirited driving we saw the fuel use rise a little higher than that but not by as much as you might think.

After a mix of primarily urban, some highway and a stint of dynamic test driving, the trip computer admitted to a figure of 8.1L/100km.

Citroen claims a handy 6.6L/100km on the combined cycle and my week with the fizzy Frenchie included a trip over the hills and far away as well as a lot of suburban running. 

The digital display on the dashboard read 7.3L/100km, which isn't bad going without stop-start. It does require 95 RON premium fuel, though.

The T-Roc is essentially a previous-generation Golf-turned-small SUV in terms of its platform, and that’s a great thing for anyone who likes driving.

The Golf 7.5 was a benchmark for everyday driving as far as hatchbacks are concerned, and even though the current Mk8 might be a bit more up to date, the T-Roc’s use of the platform it rides on is practical and fun.

It’s not as nimble as a Golf, but the T-Roc in front-drive Style guise, with a responsive turbocharged engine and no all-wheel drive system weighing it down, is not only more dynamically capable than most rivals, it’s also easy to access that capability.

The 1.4-litre engine feels well-tuned for its two modes accessible through the shifter - calm but not lazy in ‘Drive’ and eager but not thrashy in ‘Sport’.

It works well with the transmission on the move, picking right gears fairly accurately, though there are paddles behind the wheel for those who prefer to take charge.

The drive modes are also more customisable than just those on the shifter, with 'Individual' selections for steering and drivetrain able to be used rather than the standard 'Eco', 'Normal' or 'Sport' full-system modes.

While the steering wheel itself is a little thick and the feedback, while adequate, isn’t the most telling, it’s accurate and inspires confidence in cornering.

The T-Roc handles turn-in and exits well, even soaking up bumps and not becoming unsettled when braking.

Its safety systems are relatively subtle, and the active cruise control is well sorted, though the automatic braking at car park speeds can be overzealous. Something I’ve experienced in VW Group models several times over the years.

The main culprit for the T-Roc was a shrub beside my driveway that, while not touching the car, would set off the automatic braking system. Still, better than letting the car roll back if there was a proper obstacle or someone who could be hurt in the way.

Aside from that, the Volkswagen T-Roc is fun and easy to drive, and the work that’s gone into that puts its price into perspective a little more.

There are more expensive cars available that are less impressive, some even disappointing.

French cars have a very specific audience in this country, which includes weirdos like me. I've owned Peugeots and Renaults and loved every second of it.

Top of my list after my darling baby boy wrote off our family car (which was bought for him to drive), the Cactus was close to the top of the list. This fandom isn't blind, though - I know what I'm getting myself into having to dispassionately assess their faults and foibles as well as their triumphs and tangible benefits.

If I'm being honest - and it's just you and I here - I didn't think I'd like the C3 Aircross, there was just something about its SUV pretensions. I can't say the looks grabbed me and the inexplicable exclusion of the airbumps made me irrationally cross.

But once you slip behind that square-ish wheel into the comfortable embrace of those excellent seats, you forget the aesthetics (which did grow on me, even in black). 

The 1.2 turbo is, as ever, eager to please and well-matched to the six-speed auto. The two work well together to get you moving, although the engine is the noisiest installation I can remember. In the Peugeot 308, it's virtually silent.

On the move, the lovely ride also impresses, soaking up the bumps (except those aggressive rubber speed humps in shopping centre car parks) while keeping body roll to an acceptable minimum.

It's perfectly fine in the suburbs, even with its limited power. Breaking into traffic can be a bit of a moment, but there are slower cars about.

Where the Aircross is really good is out on the freeway. It's quiet for such a small car and that torque figure makes joining the M4 freeway (west out of Sydney) fine, and it cheerfully kept up on the climb up the Blue Mountains and the brakes and transmission were great down the other side.

Citroen is unashamedly about comfort over handling, but the trade-off for the comfort is pretty good in that it still handles despite a plush ride and being up on stilts.

Along with six airbags, ABS, stability and traction controls, the Aircross has low-speed AEB (up to 30km/h), blind-spot monitoring, lane departure warning, driver attention monitoring and speed sign recognition.

Three top tether anchors and two ISOFIX points complete the picture with a five-star Euro NCAP rating dating back to 2017. There is no corresponding ANCAP score, despite the agreement between the two agencies.

Volkswagen’s five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty is pretty standard for a premium-leaning brand, with VW also offering roadside assistance for the warranty period.

In terms of servicing, VW offers care plans of three years or five years, covering servicing for $1515 or $2770 respectively. That's an average of $505 or $554 per workshop visit.

Otherwise, servicing costs at 12-month/15,000km intervals can cost from $470 for some to $1104 to the biggest service if you don’t go with the locked-in package.

Citroen offers a class-competitive five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty with a five year service plan if you want to pre-pay.

That plan costs a stiff $2727 for your five visits (or every 12 months/15,000km). That's nearly three times what you'll pay for a C-HR or about $400 more than a Mazda CX-3.