Nissan Micra 2003 vs Ford Fiesta 2003
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 88 HP | 80 HP | |
| Torque: | 128 NM | 124 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15 seconds | 13.2 seconds | |
| Nissan Micra engine produces 8 HP more power than Ford Fiesta, whereas torque is 4 NM more than Ford Fiesta. Despite the higher power, Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.8 | 6.4 | |
|
The Ford Fiesta is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Nissan Micra consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Fiesta, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Micra could require 60 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 350'000 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 Ford Fiesta engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Nissan Note, Nissan Cube | Used also on Ford Focus | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.72 m | 3.92 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.54 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is smaller, but higher. Nissan Micra is 20 cm shorter than the Ford Fiesta, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 371 litres | 268 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
584 litres | 945 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Nissan Micra has 103 litres more trunk space than the Ford Fiesta. The Ford Fiesta 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 Ford Fiesta (by 361 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 0.6 metres less than that of the Ford Fiesta, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`475 | 1`525 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Ford Fiesta has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than Ford Fiesta, so Ford Fiesta quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Ford Fiesta has
| |