Mitsubishi Colt 1996 vs Nissan Almera 2000
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 1.3 - 1.6 (petrol) | 1.5 - 2.2 (petrol, diesel) | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 - 103 HP | 90 - 114 HP | |
| Torque: | 108 - 141 NM | 128 - 230 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 - 15.8 seconds | 11.1 - 13.8 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 - 8.4 | 5.7 - 7.8 | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt petrol engines consumes on average 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than Nissan Almera. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.88 m | 4.18 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.36 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is smaller. Mitsubishi Colt is 30 cm shorter than the Nissan Almera, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 9 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 240 litres | 355 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
830 litres | 1100 litres | |
|
Nissan Almera has more luggage space. Mitsubishi Colt has 115 litres less trunk space than the Nissan Almera. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Almera (by 270 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 0.4 metres less than that of the Nissan Almera, which means Mitsubishi Colt can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`471 | ~ 1`740 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Nissan Almera has
| |