Suzuki Swift 2017 vs Nissan Micra 2013
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 98 HP | |
| Torque: | 120 NM | 142 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 11.3 seconds | |
|
Nissan Micra is a more dynamic driving. Suzuki Swift engine produces 8 HP less power than Nissan Micra, whereas torque is 22 NM less than Nissan Micra. Due to the lower power, Suzuki Swift reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.3 | 4.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.2 l/100km | 6.3 l/100km | |
|
The Suzuki Swift is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Suzuki Swift consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Micra, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Suzuki Swift could require 30 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Suzuki Swift consumes 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Micra. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 37 litres | 41 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 860 km in combined cycle | 1000 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 1130 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 650 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 330'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Suzuki Baleno, Suzuki Ignis | Used also on Nissan Note | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Suzuki Swift might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.84 m | 3.78 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.67 m | |
| Height: | 1.50 m | 1.52 m | |
|
Suzuki Swift is larger, but slightly lower. Suzuki Swift is 6 cm longer than the Nissan Micra, 7 cm wider, while the height of Suzuki Swift is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 265 litres | 265 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
947 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 9.6 meters | 9.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki Swift is 0.3 metres more than that of the Nissan Micra. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`365 | 1`435 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | low | |
| Suzuki Swift has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Micra has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Suzuki Swift, so Suzuki Swift quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 13 400 | 5800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki Swift has
|
Nissan Micra has
| |