Nissan Pulsar 2014 vs Ford Focus 2014
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 170 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.7 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Nissan Pulsar is more dynamic to drive. Nissan Pulsar engine produces 10 HP less power than Ford Focus, but torque is 20 NM more than Ford Focus. Despite less power, Nissan Pulsar reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.0 | 4.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Focus is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Pulsar consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Focus, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Pulsar could require 45 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 910 km in combined cycle | 1170 km in combined cycle | |
| 1060 km on highway | 1340 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford Focus gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 300'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Nissan Juke | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Ford Mondeo, Ford C-Max, Ford EcoSport | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Ford Focus might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.39 m | 4.36 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.86 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.48 m | |
| Nissan Pulsar is 3 cm longer than the Ford Focus, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Pulsar is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 385 litres | 362 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1395 litres | 1062 litres | |
|
Nissan Pulsar has more luggage capacity. Nissan Pulsar has 23 litres more trunk space than the Ford Focus. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Pulsar (by 333 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Pulsar is 0.8 metres less than that of the Ford Focus, which means Nissan Pulsar can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`750 | 1`900 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Nissan Pulsar has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Focus has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Nissan Pulsar, so Nissan Pulsar quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7200 | 6400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Pulsar has
|
Ford Focus has
| |