Nissan Micra 2003 vs Nissan Note 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 82 HP | 86 HP | |
| Torque: | 185 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.9 seconds | 13 seconds | |
| Nissan Micra engine produces 4 HP less power than Nissan Note, whereas torque is 15 NM less than Nissan Note. Despite less power, Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.5 | 5.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 4.9 l/100km | 5.4 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Micra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Note, which means that by driving the Nissan Micra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Micra consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Note. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 46 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1020 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 1150 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| 930 km with real consumption | 850 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan Micra gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Renault Scenic, Renault Clio, Nissan Almera, Suzuki Jimny | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Clio, Renault Megane, Dacia Logan | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Note might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.72 m | 4.08 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.54 m | 1.55 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is smaller. Nissan Micra is 36 cm shorter than the Nissan Note, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 371 litres | 280 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
584 litres | 1332 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Nissan Micra has 91 litres more trunk space than the Nissan Note. The Nissan Note 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 Note (by 748 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 1.2 metres less than that of the Nissan Note, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`510 | 1`610 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | average | |
| Nissan Note has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 115 percent more cases than Nissan Note, so Nissan Note quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Nissan Note has
| |