Nissan Micra 1998 vs Renault Clio 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 1.6 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: | 55 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 79 NM | 131 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 16.4 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
Renault Clio is a more dynamic driving. Nissan Micra engine produces 35 HP less power than Renault Clio, whereas torque is 52 NM less than Renault Clio. Due to the lower power, Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 5.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Micra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Micra consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio, which means that by driving the Nissan Micra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 180 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Micra consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 42 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| 630 km with real consumption | 620 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 27 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Dacia Dokker, Dacia Logan, Renault Kangoo, Dacia Lodgy | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Clio might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.72 m | 3.77 m | |
| Width: | 1.58 m | 1.64 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is smaller, but slightly higher. Nissan Micra is 5 cm shorter than the Renault Clio, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 206 litres | 255 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
960 litres | 1035 litres | |
|
Renault Clio has more luggage space. Nissan Micra has 49 litres less trunk space than the Renault Clio. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Clio (by 75 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 1.1 metres less than that of the Renault Clio, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`290 | 1`515 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Nissan Micra has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Renault Clio, so Nissan Micra quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Renault Clio has
| |