Nissan Note 2012 vs Suzuki Swift 2015
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 200 NM | 160 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Nissan Note engine produces 46 HP less power than Suzuki Swift, but torque is 40 NM more than Suzuki Swift. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 3.6 | 6.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 4.8 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Note is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Note consumes 2.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Swift, which means that by driving the Nissan Note over 15,000 km in a year you can save 435 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Note consumes 2.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Swift. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 24 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 22 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster, Nissan Juke | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Suzuki Grand Vitara, Suzuki SX4, Suzuki Liana, Suzuki Vitara | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Nissan Note 2012 1.5 engine: The engine has many modifications, is sufficiently common and spare parts are available. The fuel consumption/power ratio is good. The fuel injection system can be a problem and the timing belt change interval ... More about Nissan Note 2012 1.5 engine Suzuki Swift 2015 1.6 engine: A simple and robust engine, not particularly demanding in terms of fuel quality. High engine timing chain lifetime. Tends to increase oil consumption, head gasket failures may occur. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.10 m | 3.89 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.53 m | 1.51 m | |
| Nissan Note is 21 cm longer than the Suzuki Swift, width is practically the same , while the height of Nissan Note is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 325 litres | 210 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1495 litres | 900 litres | |
|
Nissan Note has more luggage capacity. Nissan Note has 115 litres more trunk space than the Suzuki Swift. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Note (by 595 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Note is 0.3 metres more than that of the Suzuki Swift. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`510 | 1`520 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Nissan Note has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Suzuki Swift, so Nissan Note quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 5200 | 5200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Note has
|
Suzuki Swift has
| |