Mini Countryman 2010 vs Nissan Juke 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | 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: | 90 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 215 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.9 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
|
Nissan Juke is a more dynamic driving. Mini Countryman engine produces 20 HP less power than Nissan Juke, whereas torque is 25 NM less than Nissan Juke. Due to the lower power, Mini Countryman reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.4 | 4.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.8 l/100km | 5.7 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mini Countryman consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Juke, which means that by driving the Mini Countryman over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mini Countryman consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Juke. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 46 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1060 km in combined cycle | 930 km in combined cycle | |
| 1110 km on highway | 1060 km on highway | ||
| 810 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
| Mini Countryman gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 22 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Juke might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mini Countryman 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. | |||
| Nissan Juke 2010 1.5 engine: The engine has many modifications, is sufficiently common and spare parts are available. The fuel consumption/power ratio is good. The fuel injection system can be a problem and the timing belt change interval ... More about Nissan Juke 2010 1.5 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.10 m | 4.14 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.56 m | 1.57 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mini Countryman is 4 cm shorter than the Nissan Juke, 2 cm wider, while the height of Mini Countryman is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 350 litres | 251 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1170 litres | 830 litres | |
|
Mini Countryman has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Mini Countryman has 99 litres more trunk space than the Nissan Juke. The Nissan Juke may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mini Countryman (by 340 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`780 | 1`750 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Mini Countryman has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Juke has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Mini Countryman, so Mini Countryman quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8400 | 6000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mini Countryman has
|
Nissan Juke has
| |