Nissan Micra 2000 vs Peugeot 206 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 1.4 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: | 60 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 80 NM | 120 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15.5 seconds | 12.2 seconds | |
|
Peugeot 206 is a more dynamic driving. Nissan Micra engine produces 15 HP less power than Peugeot 206, whereas torque is 40 NM less than Peugeot 206. Due to the lower power, Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 3.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.5 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Micra is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Peugeot 206, which means that by driving the Nissan Micra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Micra consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Peugeot 206. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 42 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 790 km in combined cycle | |
| 800 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
| Peugeot 206 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 280'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen Xsara, Citroen C3, Citroen Berlingo | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Peugeot 206 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.75 m | 3.82 m | |
| Width: | 1.60 m | 1.65 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.43 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is smaller, but slightly higher. Nissan Micra is 7 cm shorter than the Peugeot 206, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 205 litres | 245 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
960 litres | 1130 litres | |
|
Peugeot 206 has more luggage space. Nissan Micra has 40 litres less trunk space than the Peugeot 206. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Peugeot 206 (by 170 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 9.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 0.7 metres less than that of the Peugeot 206, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`340 | 1`450 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Nissan Micra has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Peugeot 206 has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Nissan Micra, so Nissan Micra quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Peugeot 206 has
| |