Nissan Qashqai 2010 vs Mitsubishi ASX 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 117 HP | 117 HP | |
| Torque: | 159 NM | 154 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13 seconds | 11.4 seconds | |
| Nissan Qashqai and Mitsubishi ASX have the same engine power, but Nissan Qashqai torque is 5 NM more than Mitsubishi ASX. Nissan Qashqai reaches 100 km/h speed 1.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 6.0 | |
|
The Mitsubishi ASX is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Nissan Qashqai consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi ASX, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Qashqai could require 60 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1010 km in combined cycle | 1050 km in combined cycle | |
| 1200 km on highway | 1260 km on highway | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 360'000 km | 280'000 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 Qashqai engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 21 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Nissan Almera, Nissan Juke, Nissan Note, Nissan Micra | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Qashqai might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Nissan Qashqai 2010 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. Mitsubishi ASX 2010 1.6 engine: The Mitsubishi 4A92 is a 1.6-liter inline four-cylinder engine with a timing chain, known primarily for its low fuel consumption and relatively simple construction. It is widely used in models such as the Lancer and ASX. While the engine is fairly economical and inexpensive to maintain, it also has ... More about Mitsubishi ASX 2010 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.33 m | 4.30 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.62 m | 1.62 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Nissan Qashqai is 4 cm longer than the Mitsubishi ASX, 1 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 388 litres | 419 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1513 litres | 1219 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, This could mean that the Nissan Qashqai uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Qashqai (by 294 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| Gross weight: | 1`830 kg | 1`870 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`344 kg | 1`260 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 486 kg | 610 kg | |
| Nissan Qashqai load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 26 procentiem less than Mitsubishi ASX. Therefore, Mitsubishi ASX is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | high | |
| Mitsubishi ASX has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Qashqai has serious deffects in 90 percent more cases than Mitsubishi ASX, so Mitsubishi ASX quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5800 | 5800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Qashqai has
|
Mitsubishi ASX has
| |