Nissan Micra 2003 vs Volkswagen Polo 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.0 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 | 50 HP | |
| Torque: | 110 NM | 86 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.9 seconds | 18.4 seconds | |
|
Nissan Micra is more dynamic to drive. Nissan Micra engine produces 30 HP more power than Volkswagen Polo, whereas torque is 24 NM more than Volkswagen Polo. Thanks to more power Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 4.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 5.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.5 l/100km | 6.4 l/100km | |
|
By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Micra could require 30 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Micra consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 950 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 330'000 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 Volkswagen Polo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 23 years | 3 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Seat Ibiza, Volkswagen Lupo, Seat Arosa | |
| 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 Volkswagen Polo 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 | 3.74 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.63 m | |
| Height: | 1.54 m | 1.42 m | |
| Nissan Micra is 2 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Polo, 3 cm wider, while the height of Nissan Micra is 12 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 371 litres | 245 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
584 litres | 975 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Nissan Micra has 126 litres more trunk space than the Volkswagen Polo. The Volkswagen Polo 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 Volkswagen Polo (by 391 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 1.2 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Polo, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`475 | 1`375 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | Nissan Micra has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Polo has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Nissan Micra, so Nissan Micra quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Volkswagen Polo has
| |