Nissan Micra 2003 vs Mercedes A class 2001
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 88 HP | 82 HP | |
| Torque: | 128 NM | 130 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 12.9 seconds | |
|
Nissan Micra is more dynamic to drive. Nissan Micra engine produces 6 HP more power than Mercedes A class, but torque is 2 NM less than Mercedes A class. Thanks to more power Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.3 | 7.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.7 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Micra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Micra consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes A class, which means that by driving the Nissan Micra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Micra consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes A class. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 54 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 850 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 710 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 320'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Nissan Note, Nissan Cube | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Micra might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mercedes A class 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 | 3.61 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.54 m | 1.58 m | |
| Nissan Micra is 11 cm longer than the Mercedes A class, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 371 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
584 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 1.2 metres less than that of the Mercedes A class, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`475 | 1`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Mercedes A class has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Mercedes A class, so Mercedes A class quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Mercedes A klase has
| |