Nissan Micra 1992 vs Hyundai Getz 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.4 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 | 97 HP | |
| Torque: | 103 NM | 125 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
|
Hyundai Getz is a more dynamic driving. Nissan Micra engine produces 22 HP less power than Hyundai Getz, whereas torque is 22 NM less than Hyundai Getz. Due to the lower power, Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.1 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.8 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Micra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Hyundai Getz, which means that by driving the Nissan Micra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Micra consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Hyundai Getz. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 42 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 850 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 590 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Hyundai Accent, Kia RIO | |
| 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 Hyundai Getz 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 | 3.82 m | |
| Width: | 1.58 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.49 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is smaller. Nissan Micra is 12 cm shorter than the Hyundai Getz, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 206 litres | 254 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
960 litres | 977 litres | |
|
Hyundai Getz has more luggage space. Nissan Micra has 48 litres less trunk space than the Hyundai Getz. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Hyundai Getz (by 17 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 0.8 metres less than that of the Hyundai Getz, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`300 | 1`510 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Hyundai Getz has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 520 percent more cases than Hyundai Getz, so Hyundai Getz quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Hyundai Getz has
| |