Mitsubishi Carisma 2003 vs Nissan Almera 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.5 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 | 98 HP | |
| Torque: | 137 NM | 136 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15 seconds | 13.1 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Carisma engine produces 2 HP more power than Nissan Almera, whereas torque is 1 NM more than Nissan Almera. Despite the higher power, Mitsubishi Carisma reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.3 | 6.6 | |
|
The Nissan Almera is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mitsubishi Carisma consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Almera, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Carisma could require 255 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 1090 km on highway | ||
| Nissan Almera gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 300'000 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 Mitsubishi Carisma engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mitsubishi Lancer | 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. Mitsubishi Carisma might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.20 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.45 m | |
| Mitsubishi Carisma is 28 cm longer than the Nissan Almera, width is practically the same , while the height of Mitsubishi Carisma is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 355 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1020 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`700 | 1`710 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Nissan Almera has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mitsubishi Carisma, so Nissan Almera quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.9/10 | 9.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Carisma has
|
Nissan Almera has
| |