Mitsubishi Colt 2007 vs Nissan Micra 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 88 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 128 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.4 seconds | 12.8 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 62 HP more power than Nissan Micra, whereas torque is 82 NM more than Nissan Micra. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 4.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 6.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Micra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Micra, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Colt could require 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Micra. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 46 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 660 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km on highway | 820 km on highway | ||
| 590 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 300'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mitsubishi Colt engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Smart ForFour | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Nissan Note, Nissan Cube | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Micra might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mitsubishi Colt 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: | 3.89 m | 3.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.67 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.44 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mitsubishi Colt is 8 cm longer than the Nissan Micra, 3 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 190 litres | 255 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 457 litres | |
|
Nissan Micra has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mitsubishi Colt has 65 litres less trunk space than the Nissan Micra. This could mean that the Mitsubishi Colt uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 9.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 1.6 metres more than that of the Nissan Micra, which means Mitsubishi Colt can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`540 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | low | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3400 | 3000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Nissan Micra has
| |