Mitsubishi Space Star 2002 vs Nissan Micra 2003
| Body: | Minivan / MPV | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 82 HP | 80 HP | |
| Torque: | 120 NM | 110 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.2 seconds | 13.9 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Space Star engine produces 2 HP more power than Nissan Micra, whereas torque is 10 NM more than Nissan Micra. Despite the higher power, Mitsubishi Space Star reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.0 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Micra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Space Star consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Micra, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Space Star could require 120 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Space Star consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Micra. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 46 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
| 780 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Space Star gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 280'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 27 years | 23 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi Carisma, Mitsubishi Colt | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Space Star might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.05 m | 3.72 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.54 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Space Star is larger, but slightly lower. Mitsubishi Space Star is 33 cm longer than the Nissan Micra, 6 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Space Star is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 371 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 584 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 9.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Space Star is 1.2 metres more than that of the Nissan Micra, which means Mitsubishi Space Star can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`600 | 1`475 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Space Star has
|
Nissan Micra has
| |