Compare two cars
Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion
Dimensons & Outlines
Check vehicle history
Engine
1.5 dCi K9K 846
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. Considering they both belong to the suv segment and utilize the same 5-door suv body style and the front wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific diesel engine choice they offer. Both the engines are Renault-engineered . The first one has a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 130hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 107hp one.
SafetyA 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 Nissan displaying significantly better structural stability. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. 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. Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the Japanese car offers a considerable difference of 25% more metal.
ReliabilityReliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that Nissan does have a slight advantage, at least on all of the models level. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Nissan with an average rating of 4.3, and models under the Dacia badge with 4.1 out of 5. The same official information place Qashqai as average reliability-wise, and Duster is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the Japanese car rank it on average as 4.6, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.1 out of 5.
Performance & Fuel economyNissan is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.9 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 189 kilometers per hour, 18km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 5 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (57 mpg), in combined cycle.
Verdict
Nissan 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 beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. 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. In any case that's my personal view, built upon all the data available to me. What should decide here though is the way you feel about the two vehicles, and I hope you'll find my guidelines useful in the process. Also, you could use the oportunity to find out which car, everything taken into account, would be the perfect choice for you in the eyes of the virtual adviser™, among more than 12.000 different ones in our database.
Related articles
Nissan Tiida, commonly known as "What the hell!?", represents a school example of a horribly bad move made by a world-known automotive company. In case the name of this model doesn't ring a bell - don't worry: unlike me, you make part of those 98% of normal people...