Nissan Micra 2003 vs Toyota Aygo 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.4 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 82 HP | 55 HP | |
| Torque: | 185 NM | 130 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.9 seconds | 16.8 seconds | |
|
Nissan Micra is more dynamic to drive. Nissan Micra engine produces 27 HP more power than Toyota Aygo, whereas torque is 55 NM more than Toyota Aygo. Thanks to more power Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 3.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.5 | 4.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 4.9 l/100km | 4.7 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Aygo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Aygo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Micra could require 45 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Micra consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Aygo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 35 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1020 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 1150 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 930 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan Micra gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 2 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Renault Scenic, Renault Clio, Nissan Almera, Suzuki Jimny | Used only for this car | |
| 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: | no | yes | |
| The Toyota Aygo 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: | 3.72 m | 3.41 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.62 m | |
| Height: | 1.54 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is larger. Nissan Micra is 31 cm longer than the Toyota Aygo, 4 cm wider, while the height of Nissan Micra is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 371 litres | 139 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
584 litres | 751 litres | |
| Nissan Micra has 232 litres more trunk space than the Toyota Aygo. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Toyota Aygo (by 167 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 9.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 0.4 metres more than that of the Toyota Aygo, which means Nissan Micra can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`510 | 1`245 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Toyota Aygo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 185 percent more cases than Toyota Aygo, so Toyota Aygo quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 1800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Toyota Aygo has
| |