Nissan Micra 2005 vs Audi TT 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 88 HP | 180 HP | |
| Torque: | 128 NM | 235 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.8 seconds | 8.1 seconds | |
|
Audi TT is a more dynamic driving. Nissan Micra engine produces 92 HP less power than Audi TT, whereas torque is 107 NM less than Audi TT. Due to the lower power, Nissan Micra reaches 100 km/h speed 4.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 8.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 9.0 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Micra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Micra consumes 1.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Audi TT, which means that by driving the Nissan Micra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 240 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Micra consumes 2.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Audi TT. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 820 km on highway | 870 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 620 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 420'000 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 Audi TT engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Nissan Note, Nissan Cube | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3, Seat Ibiza, Seat Leon | |
| 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 Audi TT 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. | |||
| Audi TT 1999 1.8 engine: The engine is considered reliable, with a lifespan from 300,000 km.
The primary causes of unstable operation include air leaks through the crankcase ventilation system, throttle body malfunctions, idle air ... More about Audi TT 1999 1.8 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.81 m | 4.04 m | |
| Width: | 1.67 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.35 m | |
|
Nissan Micra is smaller, but higher. Nissan Micra is 23 cm shorter than the Audi TT, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Micra is 9 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 255 litres | 220 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
457 litres | no data | |
|
Nissan Micra has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Nissan Micra has 35 litres more trunk space than the Audi TT. The Audi TT may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Micra is 0.8 metres less than that of the Audi TT, which means Nissan Micra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`540 | 1`640 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | high | |
| Audi TT has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 80 percent more cases than Audi TT, so Audi TT quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3200 | 4600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Micra has
|
Audi TT has
| |