Nissan Micra 2017 review | What Car? first drive

Nissan Micra 2017 review | What Car? first drive

Today we’re in Little Hampton, to test this:
the new Nissan Micra. More specifically, the 1.5-litre diesel. Now, this has CO2 emissions
of well under 100g/km, and can do over 80mpg. It’s not just
a frugal little thing though – Nissan are talking about it being more fun to drive and
more spacious than before. So, what’s the new Micra like on the road? Well, the quick
answer is that it is much improved compared to its predecessor, with a good balance between
ride and handling, if not quite the levels of high speed comfort a Fabia delivers, nor
the fun that you get from a Fiesta. That said, there are positives: the diesel engine does
remain pretty refined at speed, although you do notice some vibrations through the wheel
at idle, and there is also a lot of clatter under hard acceleration. Inside? Well, the
dashboard is, for the most part, very nicely finished, with lots of soft touch bits here
and there, and comfy areas to rest your elbow. The only downside, really, is that in the
back, headroom is quite tight, and the boot isn’t quite as big as what you’d get on a
Fabia. Other things? Well, the entertainment system is easy to use, partially down to these
buttons surrounding it, although the graphics do look a little bit basic compared to some
of the best units out there. Compared to its predecessor there’s no doubt that the new
Micra is a massive step forward. Not only is it far better to drive, but there’s more
space inside for people, a bigger boot, and the interior feels much higher in quality.
Is it the car to beat? Well, we’d say that a Skoda Fabia has even more headroom to make
more comfortable travel for actual adults, and it’s a bit nicer inside still. That said,
if you’re sold on the looks, then the Micra is certainly well worth considering.

About the Author: Michael Flood


  1. should be testing the petrol not the diesel model. it's a small car and shouldn't have a diesel engine. plus give it up on the vag vag vag is better. so sick of the comparisons to vag cars. didn't like the reviewer either!

  2. This car needs a 120bhp petrol version, like its cousin the Clio, which despite being around from 2012 still looks more cohesive than this. PS, trim that disgusting beard, ffs!!!

  3. I agree with some of the other comments, why are you still reviewing diesel versions! Dieselgate should have sealed there fate

  4. This looks like a massive leap forward…annoyed by comparisons to skoda fabia though…No sane person would buy a skoda Fabia in today's market…yes it might be practical but its styling is so 1990's and despite the uk press's love for VAG cars, their engineering and reliability is dubious. Ideally
    (Although somewhat impractically) reviews should be done without the journalist knowing the make!

  5. but why the very small rear window? ….can't see much through that. …but today it's all about design/looks. …every other issue is very much secondary.

  6. If you're ever changing the registration on one of these you'll have to splash the cash on a large number plate for the rear. It would just look stupid otherwise.

  7. Never mind the motability special, more the point Chris Evans seems to have rogered Father Christmas to produce this wretched urchin! Could we please have something more respectful commentating our automotive reviews? I ask you really.. is this all there is? Shameful

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *