Nissan Note 2009 vs Kia RIO 2011
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 88 HP | 85 HP | |
| Torque: | 128 NM | 121 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.4 seconds | 13.1 seconds | |
| Nissan Note engine produces 3 HP more power than Kia RIO, whereas torque is 7 NM more than Kia RIO. Despite the higher power, Nissan Note reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 4.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.4 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
By specification Nissan Note consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Kia RIO, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Note could require 165 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Nissan Note consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Kia RIO. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 43 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 890 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 650 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 390'000 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 Kia RIO engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Nissan Micra, Nissan Cube | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Kia Picanto, Hyundai i20, Hyundai i10 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Kia RIO might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Kia RIO 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: | 4.10 m | 4.05 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.46 m | |
| Nissan Note is 6 cm longer than the Kia RIO, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Note is 10 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 280 litres | 224 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1332 litres | no data | |
|
Nissan Note has more luggage capacity. Nissan Note has 56 litres more trunk space than the Kia RIO. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Note is 0.5 metres more than that of the Kia RIO, which means Nissan Note can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`546 | 1`560 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Kia RIO has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Nissan Note, so Kia RIO quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 3600 | 4000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Note has
|
Kia RIO has
| |