Nissan Micra 2003 vs Smart ForFour 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 65 HP | 95 HP | |
| Torque: | 110 NM | 125 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 16.3 seconds | 10.8 seconds | |
|
Smart ForFour is a more dynamic driving. Nissan Micra engine produces 30 HP less power than Smart ForFour, whereas torque is 15 NM less than Smart ForFour. Due to the lower power, Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 5.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.2 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Micra is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Smart ForFour, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Micra could require 15 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Nissan Micra consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Smart ForFour. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 810 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 740 km with real consumption | 710 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 280'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 22 years | 20 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Mitsubishi Colt | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Smart ForFour might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.72 m | 3.75 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.54 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is smaller, but higher. Nissan Micra is 3 cm shorter than the Smart ForFour, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 9 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 371 litres | 268 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
584 litres | 910 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Nissan Micra has 103 litres more trunk space than the Smart ForFour. The Smart ForFour may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Smart ForFour (by 326 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 1.3 metres less than that of the Smart ForFour, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`475 | 1`450 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Smart ForFour has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Smart ForFour, so Smart ForFour quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 1800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Smart ForFour has
| |