Nissan Micra 2017 vs Ford Fiesta 2017
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 0.9 Petrol | 1.0 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: | 90 HP | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 140 NM | 170 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.1 seconds | 12.2 seconds | |
| Nissan Micra engine produces 10 HP less power than Ford Fiesta, whereas torque is 30 NM less than Ford Fiesta. Despite less power, Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.4 | 5.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.2 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Micra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Fiesta, which means that by driving the Nissan Micra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Micra consumes 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Fiesta. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 41 litres | 42 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 930 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 1100 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| 660 km with real consumption | 570 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 | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Renault Clio, Dacia Logan, Renault Captur, Smart ForFour | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Ford Focus, Ford C-Max, Ford Tourneo, Ford B-Max | |
| 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 | 4.04 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.73 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.48 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Nissan Micra is 4 cm shorter than the Ford Fiesta, width is practically the same , while the height of Nissan Micra is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | 303 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1004 litres | 984 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 0.2 metres more than that of the Ford Fiesta. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`530 kg | 1`665 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`063 kg | 1`131 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 467 kg | 534 kg | |
| Nissan Micra load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 14 procentiem less than Ford Fiesta. Therefore, Ford Fiesta is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | |||
| Ford Fiesta is better rated in child safety tests. The Ford Fiesta scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Ford Fiesta has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Ford Fiesta, so Ford Fiesta quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 10 000 | 8600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Ford Fiesta has
| |