Mitsubishi ASX 2016 vs Nissan Qashqai 2017
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 117 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 154 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.4 seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
|
Nissan Qashqai is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi ASX engine produces 46 HP less power than Nissan Qashqai, whereas torque is 86 NM less than Nissan Qashqai. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi ASX reaches 100 km/h speed 2.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.1 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi ASX is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Mitsubishi ASX consumes 0.3 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 45 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mitsubishi ASX consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Qashqai. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1030 km in combined cycle | 940 km in combined cycle | |
| 1260 km on highway | 1140 km on highway | ||
| 880 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi ASX gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 190 mm (7.5 inches) | 180 mm (7.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mitsubishi ASX 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 Mitsubishi ASX version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. Choose from three 4x4 versions of Mitsubishi ASX 2016 if off-road driveability is important to you. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 300'000 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 Mitsubishi ASX engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Nissan Juke, Nissan Pulsar | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.30 m | 4.39 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.63 m | 1.59 m | |
|
Mitsubishi ASX is smaller, but slightly higher. Mitsubishi ASX is 10 cm shorter than the Nissan Qashqai, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi ASX is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 384 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1219 litres | 1585 litres | |
|
Nissan Qashqai has more luggage space. Mitsubishi ASX has 46 litres less trunk space than the Nissan Qashqai. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Qashqai (by 366 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi ASX is 0.1 metres less than that of the Nissan Qashqai. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`870 | 1`900 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | average | |
| Mitsubishi ASX has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Qashqai has serious deffects in 55 percent more cases than Mitsubishi ASX, so Mitsubishi ASX quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 400 | 16 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi ASX has
|
Nissan Qashqai has
| |