Nissan Micra 2000 vs Ford Fiesta 2003
Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
---|---|---|---|
Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.4 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 57 HP | 68 HP | |
Torque: | 95 NM | 160 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 18.7 seconds | 14.9 seconds | |
Ford Fiesta is a more dynamic driving. Nissan Micra engine produces 11 HP less power than Ford Fiesta, whereas torque is 65 NM less than Ford Fiesta. Due to the lower power, Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 3.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.2 | 4.3 | |
Real fuel consumption: | 5.1 l/100km | 5.1 l/100km | |
The Ford Fiesta 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 Ford Fiesta, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Micra could require 135 litres more fuel. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 42 litres | 45 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 1040 km in combined cycle | |
970 km on highway | 1210 km on highway | ||
820 km with real consumption | 880 km with real consumption | ||
Ford Fiesta gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 3.75 m | 3.92 m | |
Width: | 1.60 m | 1.68 m | |
Height: | 1.44 m | 1.46 m | |
Nissan Micra is smaller. Nissan Micra is 17 cm shorter than the Ford Fiesta, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 2 cm lower. | |||
Trunk capacity: | no data | 268 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 945 litres | |
Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 9.8 meters | |
Gross weight (kg): | 1`300 | 1`560 | |
Safety: | no data | ||
Quality: | 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 (€): | 800 | 1200 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Ford Fiesta has
| |