Nissan Micra 2005 vs Toyota Aygo 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.4 Diesel | |
| 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 | 55 HP | |
| Torque: | 153 NM | 130 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 16.8 seconds | |
|
Nissan Micra is more dynamic to drive. Nissan Micra engine produces 55 HP more power than Toyota Aygo, whereas torque is 23 NM more than Toyota Aygo. Thanks to more power Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 4.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.5 l/100km | 4.7 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Aygo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Micra consumes 2.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Aygo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Micra could require 360 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Micra consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Aygo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 35 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 850 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota Aygo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 360'000 km | 390'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 2 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Nissan Almera, Nissan Juke, Nissan Note | Used only for this car | |
| 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 Toyota Aygo 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 2005 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.72 m | 3.41 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.62 m | |
| Height: | 1.54 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is larger. Nissan Micra is 31 cm longer than the Toyota Aygo, 4 cm wider, while the height of Nissan Micra is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 251 litres | 139 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
982 litres | 751 litres | |
|
Nissan Micra has more luggage capacity. Nissan Micra has 112 litres more trunk space than the Toyota Aygo. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Micra (by 231 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 9.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 0.4 metres more than that of the Toyota Aygo, which means Nissan Micra can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`490 | 1`245 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Toyota Aygo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Toyota Aygo, so Toyota Aygo quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 1800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Toyota Aygo has
| |