Nissan 200 SX 1997 vs Toyota Celica 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 200 HP | 143 HP | |
| Torque: | 265 NM | 172 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.5 seconds | 8.7 seconds | |
|
Nissan 200 SX is more dynamic to drive. Nissan 200 SX engine produces 57 HP more power than Toyota Celica, whereas torque is 93 NM more than Toyota Celica. Thanks to more power Nissan 200 SX reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.8 | 7.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.8 l/100km | 7.9 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Celica is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan 200 SX consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan 200 SX could require 165 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan 200 SX consumes 2.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 940 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 600 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Toyota Celica) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Nissan 200 SX) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
| Toyota Celica 1999 1.8 engine: The 1ZZ-FE engine is more advanced, lighter, and simpler than its predecessor, emphasizing fuel efficiency and output. However, these improvements have come at the cost of reduced durability compared to earlier cast-iron engines. The engine block features an open-deck cooling design for easier production and lower ... More about Toyota Celica 1999 1.8 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.52 m | 4.34 m | |
| Width: | 1.73 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.30 m | 1.32 m | |
| Nissan 200 SX is 18 cm longer than the Toyota Celica, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan 200 SX is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 307 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 9.6 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan 200 SX is 0.8 metres less than that of the Toyota Celica, which means Nissan 200 SX can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`780 | 1`200 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan 200 SX has
|
Toyota Celica has
| |