Nissan Cube 1999 vs Mitsubishi Space Star 1998
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 85 HP | 86 HP | |
| Torque: | 120 NM | 117 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 13.4 seconds | |
| Nissan Cube engine produces 1 HP less power than Mitsubishi Space Star, but torque is 3 NM more than Mitsubishi Space Star. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 6.8 | |
|
The Nissan Cube is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Nissan Cube consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Space Star, which means that by driving the Nissan Cube over 15,000 km in a year you can save 135 litres of fuel. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 280'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 27 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi Carisma, Mitsubishi Colt | |
| 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: | 3.75 m | 4.03 m | |
| Width: | 1.61 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.63 m | 1.52 m | |
|
Nissan Cube is smaller, but higher. Nissan Cube is 28 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Space Star, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Cube is 11 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 160 litres | 370 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1370 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi Space Star has more luggage space. Nissan Cube has 210 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Space Star. | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 9.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`340 | 1`655 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Cube has
|
Mitsubishi Space Star has
| |