(Rory) Desirability is a funny thing. Take this laptop for instance, it's not
inherently alluring on its own, but wrap it in a slimline aluminium case and
stamp a silhouette of a half-eaten piece of fruit on the front and all of a sudden everyone
wants one. And would you really spend 25 quid on a pair of these if they didn’t have a
Brazilian flag on them?
(Will) It’s a similar story with small SUVs. Let’s face it: they’re really just small hatchbacks
with mildly jacked-up driving positions and a few trinkets loosely inspired by what you’d
find on a proper 4x4. And yet somehow they are in a completely different fashion league
than their lower-riding counterparts from the Ford Fiesta class.
(Rory) But there’s always been a problem: no small SUV has ever been particularly brilliant.
Sure, cars like the Renault Captur and Suzuki Vitara have been easy enough to recommend,
but we’ve always had to do so with the caveat that you could have a better car for less
cash if you’re prepared to forgo chunkier styling and that slightly raised driving position.
Could that finally be about to change?
(Will) Well to find out, we’ve got not one, not two but three new models that could really
shake up the small SUV ranks.
The cheapest and tallest of the trio is the playfully styled Citroen C3 Aircross, a car
that indirectly replaces the boxier C3 Picasso MPV. To shine here, the Aircross will have
to see off the supposedly sportier Seat Arona, the Spanish brand’s second foray into the
SUV market after last year’s hugely successful Ateca.
Finally, there’s the rather more grown-up VW T-Roc. It’s slightly more expensive than
its rivals here, but as long as you stick to the cheaper engines and trims it’s still
pretty good value for money.
So, that leaves us with two burning questions: which of these new arrivals is best? And is
any of them a genuinely great buy without any provisos?
(Rory) Well, these cars may be dressed very differently but they do have one thing in common: they
all three have turbocharged three-cylinder petrol engines. The tiny 1.0-litre units in the Arona
and the T-Roc give better acceleration than you might imagine. In fact, the Arona I’m
driving now is actually pretty nippy.
You’re probably thinking the more powerful, bigger-engined C3 Aircross is the quickest
of the bunch but surprisingly it took the longest to get to 60mph in our tests – albeit
only fractionally.
Accelerate hard in any of our trio and you will feel a few vibrations through the soles
of your shoes. However, the T-Roc definitely does the best job of isolating you from this
and, thanks to its low levels of wind and road noise, it’s the most refined car here.
The Arona is the noisiest; you hear its suspension working away on less than perfect roads and
there’s also quite a lot of tyre roar.
Changing gear in the Arona and T-Roc is a largely pleasant experience; both shifts are
precise and free from any annoying notches. Both cars also have positive clutch pedals,
too, they're really easy to drive smoothly around town.
Not so with the C3 Aircross because a nasty cocktail of a numb clutch pedal, a
light accelerator and a woefully vague gearshift means driving smoothly at low speeds
is difficult.
Things don’t improve much when you get up to speed, either, because the Aircross has
the grabbiest brakes and the most remote steering. It also leans the most dramatically through
corners and feels the least stable and composed along challenging country roads.
At the other end of the scale is the Arona: it’s surprisingly eager to tuck its nose
into corners and stays the most upright through them. Compared with the wallowy C3
Aircross it’s actually pretty good fun.
Mind you, the T-Roc actually has the most feelsome steering of all three cars, so it’s
actually the most pleasant car to drive at moderate speeds – even though it sways about
a little more than the Arona through fast bends.
All things considered, the T-Roc rides bumps in the most comfortable fashion. It breezes
over speed humps with the least drama and deals best with the sort of long-wave undulations
you encounter along most country roads. However, in FR Sport trim the Arona gets a clever suspension
setup that allows you to stiffen and soften the dampers at your whim, and in the more
comfortable of two settings it actually stays more settled than the T-Roc along pockmarked
roads – no matter what speed you’re doing.
Meanwhile, the more softly sprung Aircross initially fools you into thinking it’ll
it'll actually be the most comfortable, but above 30mph you become acutely aware of your torso bobbing
up and down and your head tossing from side to side. Hit a pothole and there’s a sharp
crash as the suspension struggles to cope.
(Will) If you’re in the market for an SUV, there’s a good chance you like to sit a good distance
from the road. And if so, you’ll find plenty to like about the Aircross, because with all
three driver’s seats set to their lowest positions, you’re a few centimetres further
from ground than you are in the T-Roc and, even more so, the Arona.
But removing personal preference from the equation, all three have fundamentally
sound driving positions with plenty of seat adjustment and pedals that line up reasonably
neatly with the steering wheel. Some of our testers wished the Arona’s steering wheel
retracted a bit farther into the dashboard, while others found the Aircross’s gearlever
a bit of a reach, but neither issue is a major one.
Long distance comfort is a problem in all three cars, though. That’s because their
driver’s seats don’t provide much in the way of lower back support, although the Aircross
is worst in this respect. Adjustable lumbar support would help but isn’t offered on
Aircross or the Arona and is a hideously expensive option on the T-Roc.
Chunky, clearly labelled buttons and knobs make the dashboards of both the Arona and
T-Roc simple to use. If you’re a bit chilly and want to nudge up the interior temperature,
you simply twist a dial. In the Aircross, you need to delve into this hopelessly unintuitive
touchscreen; it’s such a faff it would be quicker to stop off and buy a jumper.
They may all look suitably extrovert on the outside, but climbing aboard the Arona or
T-Roc is a bit of a comedown; both interiors are conservatively styled and built with hard,
grey and not very appealing plastics. The face of Arona’s dash is at least wrapped
in something that looks like leather; it’s not much but along with these part leather
seats, means the SEAT just edges the T-Roc.
There’s more to get excited about inside the Aircross. From these art deco air vents
to the silver accents below the touchscreen, everything is just that bit more interesting
to look at. You can even choose from various colour schemes if you’re prepared to pay
extra, including a two-tone tan and black dashboard and seats, or grey seats with red
highlights on the dash. Just bear in mind that the quality of interior plastics aren’t
actually any better than those in the Arona.
What about their infotainment systems? Well, the Arona and T-Roc have the same basic 8.0in
touchscreen that’s bright, quick to respond and generally easy to use.
The only real differences are that the Arona comes with a built-in sat-nav and wireless
phone charging as standard whereas you have to pay extra for those things on the T-Roc.
Both cars have Bluetooth, USB sockets and Apple CarPlay and Android Auto smartphone
mirroring though.
Sat-nav and smartphone mirroring also come as standard on the C3 Aircross but the screen
is often annoyingly slow to respond when you press it. The screen is also relatively small
and the graphics aren’t very sharp, so overall the Aircross fails to impress in this area.
(Rory) As is often the case with small cars, we’d recommend avoiding the Aircross’s optional
panoramic roof if you’re tall yourself or plan on carrying anyone who is. Yes, it floods
the interior with light but it badly compromises headroom, particularly in the back. You won’t
have any such dilemma with the Arona or T-Roc because both have enough headroom
to comfortably accommodate occupants well over six feet tall.
If you had to sit in the back on a long journey you’d choose the Arona; its extra
legroom over the T-Roc means you feel fractionally less hemmed in, although the fact the frame
of the rear door is right next to your head is rather annoying. The Aircross has the least
rear legroom, but is actually the most comfortable for three adults sitting side-by-side.
The Aircross stands out for flexibility with these clever sliding and reclining rear seats
that come as standard on this range-topping Flair model. The Arona and T-Roc have no such
tricks up their sleeves, although like all of our protagonists they do have rear seats
that fold down in a 60/40 split.
With the rear seats in place, the Aircross has the longest and tallest boot and managed
to swallow seven carry-on suitcases – one more than the T-Roc and two more than the
Arona. Still, even the Arona, which has the shortest and shallowest load bay, can still
carry almost as many shopping bags as a VW Golf.
All cars come with height-adjustable boot floors as standard which, in their highest
settings, means there’s no annoying lip at the boot entrance or step in the floor
of the extended load bay when the seats are folded down.
(Will) Finance packages are extremely popular in this class and, if you sign up to a three-year
PCP deal, the C3 Aircross will cost you the least in monthly repayments. You’ll need
to budget an extra tenner a month if you want the Arona, while the T-Roc will set you
back a further £50 or so.
If you do have the wherewithal to pay cash, the Aircross will make the smallest dent in
your purse after haggling. However, factor in all the bills you’re likely to face during
three year of ownership, including depreciation, fuel and servicing, and the Aircross will
actually end up costing you the most. Slow depreciation means the T-Roc, the most expensive
to buy, will actually cost you the least in the long run.
As for what luxuries you get for your money, there isn’t a great deal to split our contenders.
However, if personalisation appeals then the Arona stands out because you get a choice
of five different paint colours, including several metallics, along with a contrasting
roof, should you want one – all for no extra charge.
Buy the Aircross and you’ll have a choice of Exterior Colour Packs that turns the roof
rails and door mirrors orange - like on our car - silver or white, and also adds some
decals on the rear three-quarter glass area. Likewise, VW offers a contrast colour roof
but charges between £280 and £575, depending on your colour choice.
All three cars come with automatic emergency braking as standard were awarded five stars
for safety by Euro NCAP. However, a closer look a the scores reveals the T-Roc scored
the highest marks across the board, with the C3 Aircross faring least well in the adult
occupant and pedestrian tests. Meanwhile, the Arona was found to be least impressive
at keeping child occupants safe.
(Will) So, back to our original questions: which is best and is any of them a truly great car?
Well, in the forms we’ve lined these cars up in, the T-Roc makes the most sense. It’s
the most comfortable and the most refined, has the best driving position, a decent boot
and will actually cost you the least in the long run if you’re buying outright. Just
make sure you avoid the more powerful engines and range-topping SE-L trim because these
things push the price into the territory of altogether bigger and better SUVs to choose from.
(Rory) Second place goes to the Arona. It’s a fantastic buy in cheaper forms – particularly if you
go for the 1.0 TSI 95 SE Technology. This high-end FR Sport model does bring better
performance, a slightly smarter interior and more standard equipment, but it isn’t as
comfortable as the T-Roc, has a smaller boot and is quite a bit noisier.
(Will) Despite its clever rear seats, big boot and quirky styling, the C3 Aircross finishes last.
It’s disappointing to drive, has a fiddly infotainment system and, although it initially
seems well priced, and is the cheapest a month if you’re buying on PCP finance, heavy depreciation
means it’ll actually cost you the most in the long run if you’re buying privately.
(Rory) The truth is that the best conventional hatchbacks are still better to drive and better value
for money than any of these cars, but this test proves the gap is smaller than it’s
ever been.
You can find out loads more about any of these models by heading over to whatcar.com.
(Will) And if you’re interested in buying one of these cars then make sure you check out our
latest deals by clicking on the link in the top right hand corner.
Thanks for watching and don’t forget to subscribe to our YouTube channel for a heads-up
on our latest videos.