Nissan Micra 2005 vs Mitsubishi Colt 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 109 HP | |
| Torque: | 153 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 10 seconds | |
|
Nissan Micra is more dynamic to drive. Nissan Micra engine produces 1 HP more power than Mitsubishi Colt, whereas torque is 8 NM more than Mitsubishi Colt. Thanks to more power Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 6.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.5 l/100km | 6.7 l/100km | |
|
By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Micra could require 60 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Nissan Micra consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 850 km on highway | 920 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Colt gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 360'000 km | 310'000 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: | 19 years | 20 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Nissan Almera, Nissan Juke, Nissan Note | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Smart ForFour, Mitsubishi Xpander | |
| 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: | 3.72 m | 3.87 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.54 m | 1.55 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is smaller. Nissan Micra is 15 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Colt, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 251 litres | 220 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
982 litres | 854 litres | |
|
Nissan Micra has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Nissan Micra has 31 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. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Micra (by 128 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 1 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`490 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2000 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Mitsubishi Colt has
| |