Citroën ë-SpaceTourer vs Peugeot E-Traveller
Biggest differences: Consumption — Citroën ë-SpaceTourer 23.8 kWh/100 km, Peugeot E-Traveller 24.3 kWh/100 km.
Citroën ë-SpaceTourer
The Citroën ë-SpaceTourer is an electric van in the D segment, offering two different range options and a power output of 136 horsepower.
Peugeot E-Traveller
The Peugeot E-Traveller is an electric van in the D segment, offering two battery variants with a range from 223 km to 351 km in the WLTP cycle.
Profile against the market: Citroën ë-SpaceTourer vs Peugeot E-Traveller
Citroën ë-SpaceTourerM 75 kWh
Peugeot E-TravellerStandard 75 kWh
Citroën ë-SpaceTourer or Peugeot E-Traveller — who wins where
It's a tie: 2 to 2
The score leaves out metrics where data is missing on one side.
Click a slice to see only those metrics. Each bar shows where the car stands against the whole catalogue.
- WLTP range kmPeugeot E-Traveller +2 km
- Battery kWhCitroën ë-SpaceTourer +0.5 kWh
- Consumption ↓ kWh/100 kmCitroën ë-SpaceTourer −0.5 kWh/100 km
- Power PSNo difference
- 0–100 km/h ↓ sNo data
- Top speed km/hPeugeot E-Traveller +2 km/h
- DC charging kWNo difference
- AC charging kWNo difference
- Charging ↓ minNo difference
- Weight ↓ kgNo difference
- Boot lNo data
Technical data: Citroën ë-SpaceTourer vs Peugeot E-Traveller
Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data
| Key parameters | Citroën ë-SpaceTourer M 75 kWh | Peugeot E-Traveller Standard 75 kWh | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range and energy | |||
| WLTP range | 349 km | 351 km | Peugeot +2 km |
| Battery | 69.5 kWh | 69 kWh | Citroën +0.5 kWh |
| Consumption ↓ | 23.8 kWh/100 km | 24.3 kWh/100 km | Citroën −0.5 kWh/100 km |
| Charging | |||
| DC charging | 100 kW | 100 kW | No difference |
| AC charging | 11 kW | 11 kW | No difference |
| Charging 0–80% ↓ | 45 min | 45 min | No difference |
| Range per minute of charging | 6.2 km/min | 6.2 km/min | No difference |
| Voltage | — | 400 V | — |
| Performance and drivetrain | |||
| Power | 136 PS | 136 PS | No difference |
| 0–100 km/h ↓ | — | 14.2 s | — |
| Top speed | 130 km/h | 132 km/h | Peugeot +2 km/h |
| Drivetrain | FWD | FWD | — |
| Practicality | |||
| Weight ↓ | 2136 kg | 2136 kg | No difference |
| Boot | — | — | — |
| Length | 4980 mm | 4980 mm | No difference |
| Width | 1920 mm | 1920 mm | No difference |
| Height | 1890 mm | 1890 mm | No difference |
| Wheelbase | 3275 mm | 3275 mm | No difference |
The better value in each row is bold and underlined in the colour of the car. Metrics marked ↓ — lower is better. Dimensions are shown without picking a winner.
Energy cost calculator
Citroën ë-SpaceTourer
Peugeot E-Traveller
Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.
Video reviews of both models
Citroën ë-SpaceTourer
Peugeot E-Traveller
Other comparisons in this class: Van, segment D
Frequently asked questions about this comparison
Why does the Citroën ë-SpaceTourer have a bigger battery but a shorter range than the Peugeot E-Traveller?
The Citroën ë-SpaceTourer carries 69.5 kWh and covers 349 km, while the Peugeot E-Traveller with its 69 kWh battery does 351 km. Energy use decides it: 23.8 against 24.3 kWh/100 km.
Which charges faster?
The Citroën ë-SpaceTourer accepts up to 100 kW DC, the Peugeot E-Traveller up to 100 kW. Charging from 0 to 80% takes 45 and 45 min respectively.
Which is cheaper to run?
The Citroën ë-SpaceTourer uses less electricity: 23.8 kWh/100 km against 24.3 kWh/100 km in the Peugeot E-Traveller. Over 15000 km a year that is a difference of 75 kWh — the calculator on this page turns it into money.
Technical data comes from official manufacturer materials and we do our best to verify it, but a manufacturer can change a specification without notice and mistakes do happen. Confirm the figures with a dealer before you buy — we accept no liability for decisions made on the basis of this data. Full disclaimer
Range, consumption and weight are given for the base configuration: manufacturers homologate them as a band of values that depends on wheels and equipment (e.g. 533–592 km), and we take the lightest variant, on the smallest wheels — i.e. the most favourable. The same model on larger wheels will travel a shorter distance.