2015 Nissan Micra coming to Canada (US too?) ... for under $10k ... new Micra Forum

[Simonas]

Wow. That is pathetic mileage. Around here something like that would get something like 45mpg with a TDI. Imagine if that had a 1.3 liter TDI in it. It would be able to get an easy 45mpg. But sadly, it doesn't take very good numbers to impress American car buyers...

Why don't they do a diesel version?

[Daox]

The purpose of the Micra in Canada is 'low cost to buy, and fun to drive'. The 1.6L achieves a good power to weight ratio, and is obviously and by far the cheapest car to buy. I think Nissan did a great job of targeting the market, and I think these things will sell like hotcakes (thus making the forum for it).

[MetroMPG]

Yeah, Nissan isn't talking up the fuel economy angle with this car. It's all: "low price, low price, low price, fun!"

It doesn't say much for their line-up that this is probably their most efficient model overall.

But it probably will be kind of fun to drive, and with the manual, still capable of decent numbers in the hands of a motivated eco-driver.

Also, I see ALL KINDS OF POTENTIAL for aero mods. The Micra's stock Cd is only 0.315 (compare that to 0.27 for the Mirage).

[MetroMPG]

Green Car Reports has posted an interesting bit of speculation about why Nissan was able to plop the Micra into the Canadian market with no apparent plans to so in the U.S.

They speculate that the work to "federalize" the car to North American standards was actually done by Smart, which had an agreement with Nissan to "rebadge" (and tart up) the Micra to sell as a larger Smart ForFour model alongside the Smart ForTwo.

Despite Smart having given up on that plan, the work was already done, so it was a relatively easy decision for Nissan to put the car on sale here. It was ready to go in terms of regulations.

This also means there's no reason the Micra couldn't also be sold in the U.S. It comes down to a marketing decision, not a regulatory one.

Full article: http://www.greencarreports.com/news/...d-for-by-smart

[UltArc]

I put in some numbers into the cost of these mini vehicles from new to 30k, and new to 100k. Of course, this does not include oil changes, and other services. These costs are SOLELY using the MSRP before any fees or extra costs, and using fuel price of 3.50 per gallon, other than the Cooper which needs premium, and I priced at 3.75.



I used information found here: 2-15 Micra vs competitors, power to weight ratio comparison

And replaced information if I found differences on the website. MINI data was also collected from FuelEconomy.gov.

Reviewing this, bar any errors on my part, the Micro is the best bet at 100k miles. I will be reposting this same post on Micra-Forum.com

[niky]

Should make it apples to apples, based on spec level... more comprehensively, I would have added assumed depreciation (KBB is a good source) to that calculation... though I guess the point still stands... if you want to save... buy cheap!

[UltArc]

Originally Posted by niky

Should make it apples to apples, based on spec level... more comprehensively, I would have added assumed depreciation (KBB is a good source) to that calculation... though I guess the point still stands... if you want to save... buy cheap!

I went with the cheapest models. All are standard transmission, and standard transmission EPA estimates- except the Micro, which I used the Forum predictions since no official numbers were available. The only real tosses to change would be rebates, and extra costs like delivery, any financing charges, so on. No matter what, the Micro is still the cheapest to buy (meaning less to finance if one does go that way), and even at 100k, it's fuel economy still makes it the cheapest. I did use highway mileage, and not be rude, but unless one lives in LA or NYC, highway mileage shouldn't be an issue with a standard transmission.

My logic behind it was this- oil changes, tire wear, and basic maintenance up to 100k should be level. Also, under the impression if someone wants to buy a new car, and wants the cheapest cost per mile, which is the way to go. My page autopopulates when the data is put in, so any vehicles could be used. I didn't use all of them, just the best power to weight ratio vehicles and tossed in the Chevy and Mitsubishi for good measure. Honestly, I'd probably still have the Mirage.

I think depreciation is a fair value, but one it is very subjective, two it really is a total toss up, especially for new vehicles (Mirage and Micro are brand spankin' new), manual transmissions make it harder, too. I would think if someone wanted an economy car, they would be keeping it for the long haul, but planning for more than 100k seemed a bit ridiculous for the average individual.

[MetroMPG]

PS: it's "Micra" (note the "a").

[UltArc]

Seriously? I can't believe I didn't realize that. I am more accustomed to the Micro over seas.

EDIT: Maybe I am just a bit slow, since for the past ~8 years I have been referring to it as the Micro rather than Micra. Whoops! lol

[MetroMPG]

It would be interesting to put together an automatic transmission comparison too (since most people will choose that). I suspect despite the Micra's big purchase price advantage, it will fall behind the Mirage and possibly the Spark in that scenario (which, ironically are equipped with CVT's made by Nissan's JATCO enterprise).