Nissan Note 2009 vs Mitsubishi Colt 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 109 HP | |
| Torque: | 153 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.7 seconds | 10 seconds | |
| Nissan Note engine produces 1 HP more power than Mitsubishi Colt, whereas torque is 8 NM more than Mitsubishi Colt. Despite the higher power, Nissan Note reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 6.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.5 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Note is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Nissan Note consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Note could require 60 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Nissan Note consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 830 km on highway | 920 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 660 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 360'000 km | 310'000 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 Nissan Note engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 21 years | 22 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Nissan Almera, Nissan Juke, Nissan Micra | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Smart ForFour, Mitsubishi Xpander | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Note might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Nissan Note 2009 1.6 engine: A simple and reliable engine, not particularly demanding on fuel quality. Tends to consume more oil, may have problems starting in cold weather. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.10 m | 3.94 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.55 m | |
| Nissan Note is 16 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Colt, width is practically the same also the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 280 litres | 220 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1332 litres | 1032 litres | |
|
Nissan Note has more luggage capacity. Nissan Note has 60 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Colt. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Note (by 300 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Note is 0.2 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`560 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Note has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3000 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Note has
|
Mitsubishi Colt has
| |