Nissan Micra 1996 vs Seat Arosa 1997
| 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 | 17.4 seconds | |
|
Nissan Micra is more dynamic to drive. Nissan Micra engine produces 5 HP more power than Seat Arosa, but torque is 7 NM less than Seat Arosa. Thanks to more power Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 5.8 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 42 litres | 35 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 600 km in combined cycle | |
| 800 km on highway | 740 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 540 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 | |||
| 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 Seat Arosa 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 Volkswagen Polo, Seat Ibiza, Volkswagen Lupo | |
| 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 Seat Arosa 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: | 3.70 m | 3.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.58 m | 1.64 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.46 m | |
| Nissan Micra is 16 cm longer than the Seat Arosa, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 206 litres | 130 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
960 litres | 790 litres | |
|
Nissan Micra has more luggage capacity. Nissan Micra has 76 litres more trunk space than the Seat Arosa. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Micra (by 170 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 0.6 metres less than that of the Seat Arosa, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`290 kg | 1`360 kg | |
| Net weight: | 775 kg | 880 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 515 kg | 480 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Seat Arosa has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Seat Arosa, so Seat Arosa quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Seat Arosa has
| |