Nissan Juke 2014 vs Nissan Note 2013
| Body: | Crossover / SUV | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 80 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 110 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.8 seconds | 13.7 seconds | |
|
Nissan Juke is more dynamic to drive. Nissan Juke engine produces 35 HP more power than Nissan Note, whereas torque is 80 NM more than Nissan Note. Thanks to more power Nissan Juke reaches 100 km/h speed 2.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 | 4.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.5 l/100km | 5.8 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Note is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Juke consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Note, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Juke could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Juke consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Note. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 41 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 870 km in combined cycle | |
| 930 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan Note gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 350'000 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 Nissan Note engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Nissan Pulsar | Used also on Nissan Micra | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.14 m | 4.10 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.57 m | 1.53 m | |
|
Nissan Juke is larger. Nissan Juke is 4 cm longer than the Nissan Note, 7 cm wider, while the height of Nissan Juke is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 354 litres | 325 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
797 litres | 1495 litres | |
| Nissan Juke has 29 litres more trunk space than the Nissan Note. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Note (by 698 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`710 | 1`510 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Nissan Juke has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Nissan Note, so Nissan Juke quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 10 200 | 5600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Juke has
|
Nissan Note has
| |