Mitsubishi ASX 2012 vs Nissan Qashqai 2013
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Diesel | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 130 HP | |
| Torque: | 300 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi ASX engine produces 20 HP more power than Nissan Qashqai, but torque is 20 NM less than Nissan Qashqai. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.7 | 4.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Qashqai is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi ASX consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Qashqai, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi ASX could require 195 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi ASX consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Qashqai. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1050 km in combined cycle | 1240 km in combined cycle | |
| 1220 km on highway | 1410 km on highway | ||
| 900 km with real consumption | 910 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan Qashqai gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 170 mm (6.7 inches) | 180 mm (7.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Nissan Qashqai can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Nissan Qashqai version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. Choose from two 4x4 versions of Nissan Qashqai 2013 if off-road driveability is important to you. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Renault Scenic, Renault Megane | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Qashqai might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Nissan Qashqai engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.30 m | 4.38 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.63 m | 1.59 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mitsubishi ASX is 8 cm shorter than the Nissan Qashqai, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi ASX is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 384 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1219 litres | 1585 litres | |
|
Nissan Qashqai has more luggage space. Mitsubishi ASX has 46 litres less trunk space than the Nissan Qashqai. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Qashqai (by 366 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi ASX is 0.1 metres less than that of the Nissan Qashqai. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`060 | 1`960 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | below average | |
| Mitsubishi ASX has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Qashqai has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than Mitsubishi ASX, so Mitsubishi ASX quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 400 | 10 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi ASX has
|
Nissan Qashqai has
| |