Nissan Micra 1992 vs Mazda 323 1994
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 1.5 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 | 134 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 16.4 seconds | 11.8 seconds | |
|
Mazda 323 is a more dynamic driving. Nissan Micra engine produces 35 HP less power than Mazda 323, whereas torque is 55 NM less than Mazda 323. Due to the lower power, Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 4.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.3 l/100km | 7.7 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Micra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Micra consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 323, which means that by driving the Nissan Micra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 210 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 Mazda 323. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 42 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 800 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| 660 km with real consumption | 710 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 323 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 | 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 Mazda 323 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 4 years | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Micra might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.70 m | 4.03 m | |
| Width: | 1.58 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.40 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is smaller, but slightly higher. Nissan Micra is 33 cm shorter than the Mazda 323, 12 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 206 litres | 300 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
960 litres | no data | |
|
Mazda 323 has more luggage space. Nissan Micra has 94 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 323. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 0.6 metres less than that of the Mazda 323, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`290 | 1`575 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Mazda 323 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Mazda 323, so Mazda 323 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Mazda 323 has
| |