Nissan Micra 2008 vs Mazda 3 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 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: | 110 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 153 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 11.7 seconds | |
|
Nissan Micra is more dynamic to drive. Nissan Micra engine produces 5 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 8 NM more than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 6.9 | |
| Nissan Micra consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that by driving the Nissan Micra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 790 km in combined cycle | |
| 850 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| Mazda 3 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: | 360'000 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 3 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Nissan Almera, Nissan Juke, Nissan Note | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda Xedos 6, Mazda MX-3 | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mazda 3 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. | |||
| Nissan Micra 2008 1.6 engine: A simple and reliable engine, not particularly demanding on fuel quality. Tends to consume more oil, may have problems starting in cold weather. Mazda 3 2006 1.6 engine: This engine is widely regarded as reliable, though it can develop certain issues over time. One of the most common problems is increased oil consumption, often starting after 120,000 km. This is frequently ... More about Mazda 3 2006 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.72 m | 4.42 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.54 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is smaller, but higher. Nissan Micra is 70 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 10 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 251 litres | 300 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
982 litres | 635 litres | |
| Nissan Micra has 49 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Micra (by 347 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 1.7 metres less than that of the Mazda 3, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`490 | 1`725 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | high | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3200 | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |