Nissan Micra K13 vs Nissan Micra K14: specs side by side
Quick comparison from catalog data - no editorial review of this pair yet.
Nissan · 2010–2017
Micra K13
No versions in our catalog yet
- Power
- 58–72 kW79–98 PS
- 0–100 km/h
- -
- Top speed
- -
- Kerb mass
- -
Nissan · 2016–2023
Micra K14
- Power
- 68 kW92 PS
- 0–100 km/h
- 11.8 s
- Top speed
- 178 km/h
- Kerb mass
- 1,116 kg
At a glance
Who suits what, worked out from the catalog figures of the versions above.
- Off-road Too close to call Drive and body: Front-wheel drive · Hatchback vs Front-wheel drive · Hatchback
In plain words
Nissan Micra K13 is the older design (from 2010); Nissan Micra K14 arrived in 2016. Our catalog has no 0–100 km/h for the Nissan Micra K13 yet, so some checks above leave it out.
Full specifications
| Nissan Micra K13 | Nissan Micra K14 | |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Version | No data | IG-T 92 · petrol · 68 kW (92 PS) |
| Production years | 2010–2017 | 2016–2023 |
| Body | Hatchback | Hatchback |
| Class | B-segment (small car) | B-segment (small car) |
| Country | Japan | Japan |
| Performance | ||
| Power Why it matters: More power means stronger acceleration and easier overtaking, especially with a full load. | 58–72 kW (79–98 PS) 78–97 hp Better | 68 kW (92 PS) 91 hp |
| Power, all versions | 58–72 kW (79–98 PS) 78–97 hp | 52–86 kW (71–117 PS) 70–115 hp |
| Torque Why it matters: Torque is the pulling force you feel when accelerating from low revs, towing or climbing hills. | No data | 160 Nm 118 lb-ft |
| 0–100 km/h Why it matters: A shorter 0–100 km/h time means quicker getaways and safer merging onto fast roads. | No data | 11.8 s |
| Top speed Why it matters: Top speed hints at how relaxed the car is at motorway speeds, even if you never reach it. | No data | 178 km/h 111 mph |
| Power per tonne | No data | 61 kW/t 74 hp/ton calculated |
| Engine and transmission | ||
| Fuel | Petrol | Petrol |
| Engine | No data | 999 cc · 3 cyl 1.0 l |
| Engine code | No data | H4D |
| Gearbox | No data | 5-speed manual |
| Drive | Front-wheel drive | Front-wheel drive |
| Dimensions and weight | ||
| Length | No data | 3,999 mm 157.4 in |
| Width | No data | 1,743 mm 68.6 in |
| Height | No data | 1,455 mm 57.3 in |
| Wheelbase | No data | 2,525 mm 99.4 in |
| Kerb weight Why it matters: A lighter car is usually more agile and uses less energy. | No data | 1,116 kg 2,460 lb |
| Boot Why it matters: A bigger boot fits more luggage, shopping or a pram. | No data | 300 l 10.6 cu ft |
| Fuel tank Why it matters: A larger tank means more distance between fuel stops. | No data | 41 l 10.8 gal US |
| Economy and running costs | ||
| Fuel consumption Why it matters: Lower consumption cuts running costs and CO₂ emissions on every trip. | No data | 4.5 l/100 km 52.3 mpg US |
| CO₂ | No data | 103 g/km |
| Fuel cost per year | No data | €1,180/year estimated |
| Range on a full tank | No data | 911 km 566 mi estimated |
| Safety | ||
| Euro NCAP | ★★★★☆ (2010) | ★★★★☆ (2017) |
These cars do not differ in the data we have.
Equal rows hidden (5): Body, Class, Country, Fuel, Drive.
Better marks the stronger figure - only for measurable specs (power, torque, 0–100 km/h, consumption, boot, weight).
Estimated at 15,000 km a year with fuel at €1.75/l petrol.