Nissan Micra 2005 vs Citroen C2 2003
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 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: | 88 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 128 NM | 118 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15 seconds | 14.1 seconds | |
| Nissan Micra engine produces 13 HP more power than Citroen C2, whereas torque is 10 NM more than Citroen C2. Despite the higher power, Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.8 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen C2 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C2, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Micra could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Micra consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C2. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 41 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km on highway | 830 km on highway | ||
| 580 km with real consumption | 560 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 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: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Nissan Note, Nissan Cube | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen Xsara, Citroen C3, Peugeot 206, Citroen Berlingo | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Citroen C2 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.72 m | 3.67 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.54 m | 1.46 m | |
| Nissan Micra is 5 cm longer than the Citroen C2, width is practically the same , while the height of Nissan Micra is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 251 litres | 166 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
584 litres | 879 litres | |
| Nissan Micra has 85 litres more trunk space than the Citroen C2. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Citroen C2 (by 295 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 2 metres less than that of the Citroen C2, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`475 | 1`380 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Nissan Micra has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Citroen C2, so Nissan Micra quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Citroen C2 has
| |