Nissan Micra 2000 vs Ford Fiesta 2003
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 1.0 - 1.5 | 1.2 - 2.0 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 57 - 82 HP | 68 - 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 80 - 108 NM | 106 - 204 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 - 18.7 seconds | 8.4 - 15.8 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.2 - 6.4 | 4.3 - 7.5 | |
|
Nissan Micra petrol engines consumes on average 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than Ford Fiesta. On average, Nissan Micra equipped with diesel engines consume 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Fiesta. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.75 m | 3.92 m | |
| Width: | 1.60 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is smaller. Nissan Micra is 17 cm shorter than the Ford Fiesta, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 205 litres | 268 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
960 litres | 945 litres | |
| Nissan Micra has 63 litres less trunk space than the Ford Fiesta. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Micra (by 15 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`340 | ~ 1`538 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Ford Fiesta has
| |