Mitsubishi Colt 2007 vs Nissan Note 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 95 HP | 88 HP | |
| Torque: | 125 NM | 128 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.1 seconds | 13.1 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 7 HP more power than Nissan Note, but torque is 3 NM less than Nissan Note. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.5 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Note, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Colt over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Note. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 46 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 730 km in combined cycle | |
| 970 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Colt gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 300'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Smart ForFour | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Nissan Micra, Nissan Cube | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.87 m | 4.08 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.55 m | |
| Mitsubishi Colt is 21 cm shorter than the Nissan Note, width is practically the same also the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | 280 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
854 litres | 1332 litres | |
|
Nissan Note has more luggage space. Mitsubishi Colt has 60 litres less trunk space than the Nissan Note. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Note (by 478 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 0.2 metres less than that of the Nissan Note. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`546 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Note has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | no data | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Nissan Note has
| |