Nissan Almera 2002 vs Mitsubishi Carisma 2001
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Double-row 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: | 110 HP | 102 HP | |
| Torque: | 238 NM | 215 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.4 seconds | 11.9 seconds | |
|
Nissan Almera is more dynamic to drive. Nissan Almera engine produces 8 HP more power than Mitsubishi Carisma, whereas torque is 23 NM more than Mitsubishi Carisma. Thanks to more power Nissan Almera reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.8 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km | |
|
By specification Nissan Almera consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Carisma, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Almera could require 60 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Nissan Almera consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Carisma. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1010 km in combined cycle | 1090 km in combined cycle | |
| 1270 km on highway | 1330 km on highway | ||
| 1030 km with real consumption | 1000 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 3 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Nissan Almera Tino | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volvo V40, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Volvo S40 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Carisma might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
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 | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1050 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi Carisma has more luggage space. Nissan Almera has 75 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Carisma. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`800 | 1`795 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Nissan Almera has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mitsubishi Carisma, so Nissan Almera quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 9.4/10 | 7.9/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Almera has
|
Mitsubishi Carisma has
| |