Mitsubishi Colt 2007 vs Nissan Note 2005
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 109 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 153 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 11.7 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 1 HP less power than Nissan Note, whereas torque is 8 NM less than Nissan Note. Despite less power, Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.2 | 7.0 | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.8 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 120 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 46 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 650 km in combined cycle | |
| 920 km on highway | 790 km on highway | ||
| Mitsubishi Colt gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 310'000 km | 360'000 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 Nissan Note engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 21 years | 20 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Smart ForFour, Mitsubishi Xpander | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Nissan Almera, Nissan Juke, Nissan Micra | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Note might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Nissan Note 2005 1.6 engine: A simple and reliable engine, not particularly demanding on fuel quality. Tends to consume more oil, may have problems starting in cold weather. | |||
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`560 | |
| 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 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Nissan Note has
| |