Nissan Micra 2017 vs Suzuki Baleno 2016
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 0.9 Petrol | 1.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 112 HP | |
| Torque: | 140 NM | 170 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.1 seconds | 11.4 seconds | |
|
Suzuki Baleno is a more dynamic driving. Nissan Micra engine produces 22 HP less power than Suzuki Baleno, whereas torque is 30 NM less than Suzuki Baleno. Due to the lower power, Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.4 | 4.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.2 l/100km | 5.7 l/100km | |
|
The Suzuki Baleno is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Baleno, which means that by driving the Nissan Micra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Nissan Micra consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Baleno. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 41 litres | 37 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 930 km in combined cycle | 820 km in combined cycle | |
| 1100 km on highway | 920 km on highway | ||
| 660 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan Micra gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Renault Clio, Dacia Logan, Renault Captur, Smart ForFour | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Suzuki Swift, Suzuki SX4 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Micra might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.00 m | 4.00 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.47 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Nissan Micra and Suzuki Baleno are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | 355 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1004 litres | 1085 litres | |
|
Suzuki Baleno has more luggage space. Nissan Micra has 55 litres less trunk space than the Suzuki Baleno. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Suzuki Baleno (by 81 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 0.3 metres more than that of the Suzuki Baleno. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`530 kg | 1`430 kg | |
| Safety: | |||
| Nissan Micra scores higher in safety tests, but Suzuki Baleno is better rated in child safety tests. The Nissan Micra scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | low | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 10 000 | 6200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Suzuki Baleno has
| |