Nissan Almera 2002 vs Mitsubishi Carisma 1995
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 1.5 - 2.2 | 1.6 - 1.9 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 82 - 136 HP | 90 - 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 136 - 304 NM | 137 - 265 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.2 - 14.5 seconds | 9.2 - 15 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.8 - 7.8 | 5.4 - 8.3 | |
|
Nissan Almera petrol engines consumes on average 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than Mitsubishi Carisma. On average, a Nissan Almera with diesel engines consumes about the same amount of fuel per 100 km as a Mitsubishi Carisma. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.20 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.40 m | |
| Nissan Almera is 28 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Carisma, width is practically the same , while the height of Nissan Almera is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 355 litres | 440 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1020 litres | 1150 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi Carisma has more luggage space. Nissan Almera has 85 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Carisma. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Carisma (by 130 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`756 | ~ 1`696 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 9.4/10 | 7.9/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Almera has
|
Mitsubishi Carisma has
| |