Nissan Micra 2003 vs Renault Clio 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.1 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: | 80 HP | 60 HP | |
| Torque: | 110 NM | 93 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.9 seconds | 15 seconds | |
|
Nissan Micra is more dynamic to drive. Nissan Micra engine produces 20 HP more power than Renault Clio, whereas torque is 17 NM more than Renault Clio. Thanks to more power Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 6.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.5 l/100km | 6.3 l/100km | |
|
By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio, which means that by driving the Nissan Micra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Nissan Micra consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 790 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Clio gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 23 years | 18 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Renault Kangoo, Renault Twingo | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.72 m | 3.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.64 m | |
| Height: | 1.54 m | 1.42 m | |
| Nissan Micra is 9 cm shorter than the Renault Clio, 2 cm wider, while the height of Nissan Micra is 12 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 371 litres | 255 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
584 litres | 1035 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Nissan Micra has 116 litres more trunk space than the Renault Clio. The Renault Clio 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 Renault Clio (by 451 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 1.1 metres less than that of the Renault Clio, 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 | ||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Renault Clio has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Renault Clio, so Renault Clio quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Renault Clio has
| |