Mitsubishi Carisma 1997 vs Nissan Almera 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.8 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: | 125 HP | 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 174 NM | 163 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 10.8 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Carisma is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Carisma engine produces 9 HP more power than Nissan Almera, whereas torque is 11 NM more than Nissan Almera. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Carisma reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 7.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Carisma is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Carisma consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Almera, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Carisma over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Carisma consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Almera. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 890 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 1110 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 810 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Carisma gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 23 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volvo V40, Volvo S40, Mitsubishi Galant | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Nissan Primera, Nissan Almera Tino, Nissan Sentra | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mitsubishi Carisma 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: | 4.48 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: | 430 litres | 355 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
660 litres | 1020 litres | |
| Mitsubishi Carisma has 75 litres more trunk space than the Nissan Almera. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Almera (by 360 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`685 | 1`735 | |
| 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
| |