Ford Focus 2014 vs Nissan Pulsar 2014
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 1.2 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: | 100 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | 10.7 seconds | |
|
Nissan Pulsar is a more dynamic driving. Ford Focus engine produces 15 HP less power than Nissan Pulsar, whereas torque is 20 NM less than Nissan Pulsar. Due to the lower power, Ford Focus reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.6 | 5.0 | |
| 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 Ford Focus consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Pulsar, which means that by driving the Ford Focus over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 46 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1190 km in combined cycle | 910 km in combined cycle | |
| 1410 km on highway | 1060 km on highway | ||
| 830 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford Focus gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 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 Ford Focus engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Ford C-Max, Ford Fiesta, Ford Tourneo, Ford B-Max | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Nissan Juke | |
| 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: | 4.36 m | 4.39 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.52 m | |
| Ford Focus is 3 cm shorter than the Nissan Pulsar, 9 cm wider, while the height of Ford Focus is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 362 litres | 385 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1062 litres | 1395 litres | |
|
Nissan Pulsar has more luggage space. Ford Focus has 23 litres less trunk space than the Nissan Pulsar. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Pulsar (by 333 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Focus is 0.8 metres more than that of the Nissan Pulsar, which means Ford Focus can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`900 | 1`750 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | 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 (€): | 5800 | 6200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Focus has
|
Nissan Pulsar has
| |