Compare two cars

Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion

Car #1
Make
Model
Variant
Engine
Car #2
Make
Model
Variant
Engine

compare selected cars
2014. - 2018.
C - Small family car
hatchback, 5 door
front
Badges
Production
Vehicle class
Body style
Wheel drive
Safety
2013. - 2015.
C - Small family car
hatchback, 5 door
front

Marketing

!function(v,t,o){var a=t.createElement("script");a.src="https://ad.vidverto.io/vidverto/js/aries/v1/invocation.js",a.setAttribute("fetchpriority","high");var r=v.top;r.document.head.appendChild(a),v.self!==v.top&&(v.frameElement.style.cssText="width:0px!important;height:0px!important;"),r.aries=r.aries||{},r.aries.v1=r.aries.v1||{commands:[]};var c=r.aries.v1;c.commands.push((function(){var d=document.getElementById("_vidverto-725dc94bb887f000f0b279c49613751c");d.setAttribute("id",(d.getAttribute("id")+(new Date()).getTime()));var t=v.frameElement||d;c.mount("10285",t,{width:720,height:405})}))}(window,document); */ ?>

Dimensons & Outlines

4387 mm
1768 mm
1515 mm
385 liters
1395 liters
46 liters
Length
Width
Height
Boot (min)
Boot (max)
Fuel tank
4275 mm
1760 mm
1460 mm
360 liters
1200 liters
50 liters
2014 Nissan Pulsar
2013 Toyota Auris

Engine

Renault / Nissan
1.5 dCi K9K 865
Diesel
4 - Inline, 2 valves per cylinder
Turbo
1461 cc
110 hp
240 Nm
Engine
Fuel
Configuration
Aspiration
Displacement
Power
Torque
Diesel
4 - Inline, 2 valves per cylinder
Turbo
1364 cc
90 hp
190 Nm

Performance (manual gearbox)

manual gearbox - 6 gears
1245 kg
11.5 s
190 km/h
4.1 l/100km
3.3 l/100km
3.6 l/100km
94 g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
manual gearbox - 6 gears
1180 kg
12.5 s
180 km/h
4.4 l/100km
3.4 l/100km
3.8 l/100km
99 g/km

Performance (automatic gearbox)

 
kg
s
km/h
l/100km
l/100km
l/100km
g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
 
kg
s
km/h
l/100km
l/100km
l/100km
g/km

Expenses

8300 EUR
Price from
11000 EUR

Virtual Adviser's™ opinion

Overview

Well, these are two pretty similar cars we have here! It's only details that could potentially make the difference. Considering they both belong to the small family car segment and utilize the same 5-door hatchback body style and the front wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific diesel engine choice they offer. The first one has a Renault-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 110hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 90hp engine designed by Toyota.

Safety

A starting point here would be to take a look at the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests which were performed on both of the cars, 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 small family car segment, which is generally classifying them somewhere in the middle safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. Furthermore, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, Pulsar offers a marginal difference of 6% more metal.

Reliability

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, when all the models are taken into account. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Nissan with an average rating of 4.3, and models under the Toyota badge with 4.6 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed Pulsar as average reliability-wise, and Auris is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as Pulsar rank it on average as 4.3, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.8 out of 5.

Performance & Fuel economy

Nissan is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 190 kilometers per hour, 10km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 3.7 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (76 mpg), in combined cycle.


Verdict

Toyota 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, Pulsar offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. It all continues in the same direction, with Nissan outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but Nissan. 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. In case you have two minutes to spare I invite you to define your needs, desires and budget and see which car would be chosen by the virtual adviser, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.

Check a car by its VIN number

Follow us

AutoManiac Instagram

AutoManiac Facebook

AutoManiac database currently covers:

47worldwide automotive brands
1.592different vehicle models
2.311engines
14.428specific cars