Mitsubishi ASX 2010 vs Nissan Qashqai 2011
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 117 HP | 131 HP | |
| Torque: | 154 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.4 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
|
Nissan Qashqai is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi ASX engine produces 14 HP less power than Nissan Qashqai, whereas torque is 166 NM less than Nissan Qashqai. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi ASX reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 5.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Qashqai is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi ASX consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Qashqai, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi ASX could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi ASX consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Qashqai. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1050 km in combined cycle | 1270 km in combined cycle | |
| 1260 km on highway | 1410 km on highway | ||
| 910 km with real consumption | 1000 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan Qashqai gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Renault Scenic, Renault Megane | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Nissan Qashqai 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: | 4.30 m | 4.33 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.62 m | 1.62 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: | 419 litres | 410 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1219 litres | 1513 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Mitsubishi ASX has 9 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 | 2`100 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | low | |
| Mitsubishi ASX has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Qashqai has serious deffects in 90 percent more cases than Mitsubishi ASX, so Mitsubishi ASX quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6600 | 7800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi ASX has
|
Nissan Qashqai has
| |