Nissan Micra 2006 vs Mazda MX-5 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 126 HP | |
| Torque: | 153 NM | 167 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
|
Mazda MX-5 is a more dynamic driving. Nissan Micra engine produces 16 HP less power than Mazda MX-5, whereas torque is 14 NM less than Mazda MX-5. Due to the lower power, Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 7.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.4 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Micra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda MX-5, which means that by driving the Nissan Micra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Micra consumes 1.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda MX-5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 820 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 600 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Nissan Micra) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Mazda MX-5) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 360'000 km | 380'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 19 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Nissan Almera, Nissan Juke, Nissan Note | 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.81 m | 4.00 m | |
| Width: | 1.67 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.26 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is smaller, but higher. Nissan Micra is 19 cm shorter than the Mazda MX-5, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 18 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 255 litres | 150 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
457 litres | no data | |
|
Nissan Micra has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Nissan Micra has 105 litres more trunk space than the Mazda MX-5. The Mazda MX-5 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 0.8 metres less than that of the Mazda MX-5, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`540 | 1`355 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Mazda MX-5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Mazda MX-5, so Mazda MX-5 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3000 | 5400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Mazda MX-5 has
| |