BMW 3 series 1993 vs Nissan Micra 1992
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 102 HP | 55 HP | |
| Torque: | 150 NM | 79 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 16.4 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is more dynamic to drive. BMW 3 series engine produces 47 HP more power than Nissan Micra, whereas torque is 71 NM more than Nissan Micra. Thanks to more power BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 4.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 6.3 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Micra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 1.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Micra, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW 3 series could require 285 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Micra. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 42 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 800 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 660 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| 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 (BMW 3 series) 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: | 420'000 km | 280'000 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 BMW 3 series engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 11 years | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The BMW 3 series 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: | 4.21 m | 3.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.58 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.43 m | |
|
BMW 3 series is larger, but slightly lower. BMW 3 series is 51 cm longer than the Nissan Micra, 12 cm wider, while the height of BMW 3 series is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 325 litres | 206 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1030 litres | 960 litres | |
|
BMW 3 series has more luggage capacity. BMW 3 series has 119 litres more trunk space than the Nissan Micra. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in BMW 3 series (by 70 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 9.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.8 metres more than that of the Nissan Micra, which means BMW 3 series can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`635 | 1`290 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Nissan Micra has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Nissan Micra, so Nissan Micra quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Nissan Micra has
| |