Toyota C-HR 2016 vs Nissan Qashqai 2017
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 116 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 185 NM | 165 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.1 seconds | 12.9 seconds | |
|
Toyota C-HR is more dynamic to drive. Toyota C-HR engine produces 1 HP more power than Nissan Qashqai, whereas torque is 20 NM more than Nissan Qashqai. Thanks to more power Toyota C-HR reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 5.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 8.2 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota C-HR is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Toyota C-HR consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Qashqai, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Toyota C-HR could require 45 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Toyota C-HR consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Qashqai. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 980 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 1050 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 280'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Nissan Juke, Nissan Pulsar | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Toyota C-HR 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.36 m | 4.39 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.56 m | 1.59 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Toyota C-HR is 3 cm shorter than the Nissan Qashqai, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Toyota C-HR is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 377 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1585 litres | |
|
Nissan Qashqai has more luggage space. Toyota C-HR has 53 litres less trunk space than the Nissan Qashqai. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota C-HR is 0.3 metres more than that of the Nissan Qashqai. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`865 | 1`880 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 21 000 | 16 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota C-HR has
|
Nissan Qashqai has
| |