Nissan Micra 1998 vs Volkswagen Polo 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 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: | 55 HP | 50 HP | |
| Torque: | 79 NM | 86 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 16.4 seconds | 18.4 seconds | |
|
Nissan Micra is more dynamic to drive. Nissan Micra engine produces 5 HP more power than Volkswagen Polo, but torque is 7 NM less than Volkswagen Polo. Thanks to more power Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 5.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 6.4 l/100km | |
|
By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Micra could require 45 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Micra consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 42 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km on highway | 950 km on highway | ||
| 630 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Polo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 330'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Volkswagen Polo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 3 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Seat Ibiza, Volkswagen Lupo, Seat Arosa | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Polo engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.72 m | 3.74 m | |
| Width: | 1.58 m | 1.63 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is smaller, but slightly higher. Nissan Micra is 2 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Polo, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 206 litres | 245 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
960 litres | 975 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Polo has more luggage space. Nissan Micra has 39 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Polo. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volkswagen Polo (by 15 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 1.2 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Polo, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`290 | 1`375 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Volkswagen Polo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Volkswagen Polo, so Volkswagen Polo quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Volkswagen Polo has
| |