Nissan Juke 2010 vs Mitsubishi ASX 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 117 HP | 117 HP | |
| Torque: | 157 NM | 154 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 11.4 seconds | |
|
Nissan Juke is more dynamic to drive. Nissan Juke and Mitsubishi ASX have the same engine power, but Nissan Juke torque is 3 NM more than Mitsubishi ASX. Nissan Juke reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi ASX is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Juke consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi ASX, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Juke could require 30 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Juke consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi ASX. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 1080 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 1280 km on highway | ||
| 620 km with real consumption | 910 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi ASX gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 360'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Nissan Almera, Nissan Note, Nissan Micra | 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. Nissan Juke might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Nissan Juke 2010 1.6 engine: A simple and reliable engine, not particularly demanding on fuel quality. Tends to consume more oil, may have problems starting in cold weather. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.14 m | 4.30 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.57 m | 1.62 m | |
|
Nissan Juke is smaller. Nissan Juke is 16 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi ASX, width is practically the same , while the height of Nissan Juke is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 251 litres | 442 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
830 litres | 1219 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi ASX has more luggage space. Nissan Juke has 191 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi ASX. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi ASX (by 389 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`645 | 1`870 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | high | |
| Mitsubishi ASX has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Juke has serious deffects in 100 percent more cases than Mitsubishi ASX, so Mitsubishi ASX quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6000 | 11 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Juke has
|
Mitsubishi ASX has
| |