Mitsubishi ASX 2016 vs Nissan Qashqai 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 360 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.8 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi ASX is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi ASX and Nissan Qashqai have the same engine power, but Mitsubishi ASX torque is 40 NM more than Nissan Qashqai. Mitsubishi ASX reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 6.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.7 l/100km | 8.2 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi ASX is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi ASX consumes 1 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 150 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi ASX consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Qashqai. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1030 km in combined cycle | 950 km in combined cycle | |
| 1200 km on highway | 1140 km on highway | ||
| 770 km with real consumption | 790 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 180 mm (7.1 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 16 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mitsubishi Outlander, Mitsubishi L 200 | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Opel Vivaro | |
| 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. | |||
| Nissan Qashqai 2010 2.0 engine: The engine has a good power to fuel consumption ratio and, with careful maintenance, a long service life. The most common problems with these engines are with the fuel injection system and lubrication. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.36 m | 4.33 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.63 m | 1.62 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mitsubishi ASX is 3 cm longer than the Nissan Qashqai, 3 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi ASX is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 419 litres | 410 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1219 litres | 1513 litres | |
| Mitsubishi ASX has 9 litres more trunk space than the Nissan Qashqai. 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): | 2`060 | 2`085 | |
| 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 150 percent more cases than Mitsubishi ASX, so Mitsubishi ASX quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 10 400 | 6000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi ASX has
|
Nissan Qashqai has
| |