Mitsubishi ASX 2012 vs Nissan Qashqai 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 117 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 154 NM | 156 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.4 seconds | 11.8 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi ASX is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi ASX engine produces 2 HP more power than Nissan Qashqai, but torque is 2 NM less than Nissan Qashqai. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi ASX reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 6.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi ASX is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi ASX consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Qashqai, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi ASX over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi ASX consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Qashqai. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1080 km in combined cycle | 980 km in combined cycle | |
| 1280 km on highway | 1160 km on highway | ||
| 910 km with real consumption | 850 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi ASX gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 190 mm (7.5 inches) | 201 mm (7.9 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Nissan Qashqai can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Nissan Qashqai version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. Choose from five 4x4 versions of Nissan Qashqai 2010 if off-road driveability is important to you. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 360'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 20 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Nissan Almera, Nissan Juke, Nissan Note, Nissan Micra | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Qashqai might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Nissan Qashqai 2010 1.6 engine: A simple and reliable engine, not particularly demanding on fuel quality. Tends to consume more oil, may have problems starting in cold weather. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.30 m | 4.33 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.62 m | 1.61 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mitsubishi ASX is 4 cm shorter than the Nissan Qashqai, 1 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 442 litres | 410 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1219 litres | 1513 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Mitsubishi ASX has 32 litres more trunk space than the Nissan Qashqai. The Nissan Qashqai 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 Nissan Qashqai (by 294 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`870 | 1`830 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | below average | |
| Mitsubishi ASX has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Qashqai has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than Mitsubishi ASX, so Mitsubishi ASX quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 000 | 7000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi ASX has
|
Nissan Qashqai has
| |