Nissan Micra 2000 vs Mazda Demio 1997
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 1.3 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: | 60 HP | 63 HP | |
| Torque: | 80 NM | 103 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 18 seconds | 14 seconds | |
|
Mazda Demio is a more dynamic driving. Nissan Micra engine produces 3 HP less power than Mazda Demio, whereas torque is 23 NM less than Mazda Demio. Due to the lower power, Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.1 | 7.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 6.7 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda Demio is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda Demio, which means that by driving the Nissan Micra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 135 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Nissan Micra consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda Demio. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 42 litres | 43 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 610 km in combined cycle | |
| 840 km on highway | 710 km on highway | ||
| 530 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 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 Mazda Demio engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 18 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Mazda 121 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda Demio might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mazda Demio 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: | 3.75 m | 3.82 m | |
| Width: | 1.60 m | 1.65 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.54 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is smaller. Nissan Micra is 7 cm shorter than the Mazda Demio, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 10 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 205 litres | 330 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
960 litres | 1298 litres | |
|
Mazda Demio has more luggage space. Nissan Micra has 125 litres less trunk space than the Mazda Demio. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda Demio (by 338 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 9.2 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`340 | 1`450 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Mazda Demio has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 140 percent more cases than Mazda Demio, so Mazda Demio quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Mazda Demio has
| |