Nissan Micra 2005 vs Ford Fiesta 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 65 HP | 70 HP | |
| Torque: | 110 NM | 106 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 16.3 seconds | 17.3 seconds | |
|
Nissan Micra is more dynamic to drive. Nissan Micra engine produces 5 HP less power than Ford Fiesta, but torque is 4 NM more than Ford Fiesta. Despite less power, Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 6.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.2 l/100km | 6.8 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Micra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Fiesta, which means that by driving the Nissan Micra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Micra consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Fiesta. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 730 km in combined cycle | |
| 740 km with real consumption | 660 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan Micra gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 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 Ford Fiesta engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 23 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Ford KA | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Ford Fiesta 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.72 m | 3.92 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.54 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is smaller, but higher. Nissan Micra is 20 cm shorter than the Ford Fiesta, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 251 litres | 284 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
584 litres | no data | |
|
Ford Fiesta has more luggage space. Nissan Micra has 33 litres less trunk space than the Ford Fiesta. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 0.6 metres less than that of the Ford Fiesta, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`475 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Ford Fiesta has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Ford Fiesta, so Ford Fiesta quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 1400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Ford Fiesta has
| |