Mitsubishi Carisma 2001 vs Nissan Almera 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| 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: | 102 HP | 112 HP | |
| Torque: | 215 NM | 248 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 11.4 seconds | |
|
Nissan Almera is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Carisma engine produces 10 HP less power than Nissan Almera, whereas torque is 33 NM less than Nissan Almera. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Carisma reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.0 l/100km | 6.3 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Carisma is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Carisma consumes 0.4 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 60 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Carisma consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Almera. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1090 km in combined cycle | 1010 km in combined cycle | |
| 1330 km on highway | 1270 km on highway | ||
| 1000 km with real consumption | 950 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Carisma gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volvo V40, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Volvo S40 | 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. | |||
| Mitsubishi Carisma 2001 1.9 engine: Long-lasting and fuel-efficient engine. Maintaining oil change and maintenance intervals is essential for a long engine life, as poor or untimely oil changes can result in turbine and oil pump damage, followed ... More about Mitsubishi Carisma 2001 1.9 engine | |||
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 |
1050 litres | 1020 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi Carisma has more luggage capacity. 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 Mitsubishi Carisma (by 30 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`795 | 1`810 | |
| 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 (€): | 1000 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.9/10 | 9.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Carisma has
|
Nissan Almera has
| |