Compare two cars
Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion
Dimensons & Outlines
Engine
1.5 dCi K9K 865
1.5 dCi K9K 865
Performance (manual gearbox)
Performance (automatic gearbox)
Expenses
Virtual Adviser's™ opinion
Well, these are two pretty similar cars we have here! It's only details that could potentially make the difference. Not only that they both belong to the suv segment and utilize the same 5-door suv body style, they are even powered by the same Renault-developed diesel engine! There is not much there to point us towards one vehicle or the other. Or is it?
SafetyBoth vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the same number of safety stars gained in the process. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the suv segment, which is generally a very good thing safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. On the other hand, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the Japanese car offers a marginal difference of 7% more metal.
ReliabilityI don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, at least on all of the models level. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Renault with an average rating of 4.2, and models under the Nissan badge with 4.3 out of 5. The same official information place Captur as average reliability-wise, and Juke is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as these two vehicles rank it on average as 4.3 out of 5.
Performance & Fuel economyRenault is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.2 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 175 kilometers per hour, exactly the same as the other car does. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 3.9 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (73 mpg), in combined cycle.
Verdict
Renault appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In my opinion, everything taken into account, the Japanese car offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. From there things take a different direction, with Renault offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! No mistake, whatever you decide here, but I'd still go for the Renault. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. I suggest you spend two more minutes in order to find out which car, based on your needs and budget, would be picked by the virtual adviser™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.