Nissan Micra 1996 vs Volkswagen Lupo 1998
| 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 | 17.7 seconds | |
|
Nissan Micra is more dynamic to drive. Nissan Micra engine produces 5 HP more power than Volkswagen Lupo, but torque is 7 NM less than Volkswagen Lupo. Thanks to more power Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 5.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.5 l/100km | 6.4 l/100km | |
|
By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Lupo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Micra could require 30 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Micra consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Lupo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 42 litres | 34 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 600 km in combined cycle | |
| 800 km on highway | 730 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 530 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan Micra 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 Lupo 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, 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 Lupo 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 | 3.53 m | |
| Width: | 1.58 m | 1.64 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.46 m | |
| Nissan Micra is 17 cm longer than the Volkswagen Lupo, 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 |
960 litres | 830 litres | |
|
Nissan Micra has more luggage capacity. Nissan Micra has 76 litres more trunk space than the Volkswagen Lupo. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Micra (by 130 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 Volkswagen Lupo, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`290 | 1`340 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Volkswagen Lupo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Volkswagen Lupo, so Volkswagen Lupo quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Volkswagen Lupo has
| |