Nissan Micra 2011 vs Mitsubishi Colt 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.1 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 80 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 110 NM | 100 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.7 seconds | 12.8 seconds | |
| Nissan Micra engine produces 5 HP more power than Mitsubishi Colt, whereas torque is 10 NM more than Mitsubishi Colt. Despite the higher power, Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.0 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.2 l/100km | 6.1 l/100km | |
|
By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt, which means that by driving the Nissan Micra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Nissan Micra consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 41 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 660 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 300'000 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 Nissan Micra engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Nissan Note | Used also on Smart ForFour | |
| 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: | 3.78 m | 3.88 m | |
| Width: | 1.67 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.52 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is smaller. Nissan Micra is 10 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Colt, 3 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 265 litres | 220 litres | |
|
Nissan Micra has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Nissan Micra has 45 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Colt. The Mitsubishi Colt may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.3 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 1.5 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Colt, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`425 | 1`450 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4400 | 2800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Mitsubishi Colt has
| |