Nissan Micra 1996 vs Honda Civic 2003
| Body: | Hatchback | Coupe | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.7 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: | 75 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 103 NM | 152 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
|
Honda Civic is a more dynamic driving. Nissan Micra engine produces 45 HP less power than Honda Civic, whereas torque is 49 NM less than Honda Civic. Due to the lower power, Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.1 | 7.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.7 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Micra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda Civic, which means that by driving the Nissan Micra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 135 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Micra consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda Civic. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 42 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 850 km on highway | 870 km on highway | ||
| 620 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 420'000 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 Honda Civic engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Honda FR-V, Honda Stream | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.70 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.58 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.40 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is smaller, but slightly higher. Nissan Micra is 78 cm shorter than the Honda Civic, 11 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 206 litres | 441 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
960 litres | no data | |
|
Honda Civic has more luggage space. Nissan Micra has 235 litres less trunk space than the Honda Civic. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 1.6 metres less than that of the Honda Civic, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`300 | 1`570 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Honda Civic has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 215 percent more cases than Honda Civic, so Honda Civic quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 1600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Honda Civic has
| |