1997 Nissan Micra Reviews

1997 Nissan Micra GX 1.0 from UK and Ireland

Model year1997
Year of manufacture1997
First year of ownership2012
Most recent year of ownership2012
Engine and transmission 1.0 Automatic
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 0 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
0.0 / 10
Distance when acquired36000 miles
Most recent distance36000 miles
Previous carRover - Austin 400

Summary:

Excellent so far (touch wood)

Faults:

The first few days of owning the car, the car would not start, but all what was needed was the spark plugs wiped and cleaned, and it started first time.

General Comments:

I love it, I am a delivery driver, and have owned a Ford KA, a Rover 400, a Peugeot 306 and now a Nissan Micra. This is the first car that I felt safe and happy going 60 in a 60 on dark country lanes.

The speed for an automatic is pretty good, it does give a nice smooth drive near enough all of the time. I was a bit worried, thinking that automatic means slow, but I was passing manuals with no problems at all.

It is a great car for low cost motoring, I received a rebate from my insurance company, and also £7 cheaper insurance every month. Tyres are cheaper, and fuel is cheaper to fill the tank.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 13th January, 2012

15th Jan 2012, 06:42

It's a good automatic because it's not an "automatic" per se, it's a CVT, which gives effortless gear changes, and worked well with the Micra's engines.

1997 Nissan Micra Vibe 1.0 16v from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1997
First year of ownership2008
Most recent year of ownership2008
Engine and transmission 1.0 16v Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 5 / 10
Dealer Service marks 2 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.8 / 10
Distance when acquired90000 miles
Most recent distance91000 miles

Summary:

A death trap and total rot box - Never again

Faults:

Did not have the car long enough for much to go wrong, but the only things I replaced were the tyres, and the centre and rear exhaust sections.

Locks were stiff and difficult to operate on doors.

The killer that was so bad that I got rid of the car was rust, and lots of it.

Nissan Micras are rot boxes, the floor pan was rotten under the back seats area, and the sills both sides were totally and extensively rotted into holes. I don't know how on earth it had MOT on it like this.

As I knew that I would soon be pedaling the car like Fred Flintstone through the floor, I got shot to the scrap man straight away - what a death trap.

General Comments:

I was always told how reliable Nissans are, but what good is a reliable engine if the car it powers is rotten through and fails its MOT, requiring hundreds of pounds of welding doing.

11 years old and 90,000 miles is not valid enough an excuse for a car to be scrapped due to severe under body rot. The car I bought as its replacement, a 14 year old Vauxhall Cavalier, is tons better underneath, hardly any rot at all.

I would not advise anyone to buy an old Micra, or if you do, check underneath it first for rot and budget plenty for welding at MOT time.

As far as the car was concerned, it was a cheap runabout, cheap on fuel, cheap on tyres, group 3 insurance, but very poorly built, rattly and generally shabby.

Never again, this car has left a bitter taste in my mouth for a Nissan, I will stick with Ford or Vauxhall, at least they are designed for the weather we get in this country.

The only thing I will say in its favour, was that it started up, it drove around, and it stopped. It had no creature comforts, no power steering, no electric windows, no sunroof, no central locking, no A/C, no nothing - very utilitarian. I was more comfortable on the bus. There is no way that they are worth the second hand prices asked for them. The Cavalier cost me less than the Micra did and it is much much better, even though it is only a 1.8 8v LS model.

All you people that want to drive around in tiny cars to save on the fuel economy - give the Micra a miss, or buy one less than 7 years old, or the money you save on fuel will go to pay the welder at MOT time.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 18th November, 2008

23rd Nov 2008, 21:01

When you bought this car as used one, did you check out its underbody? Just get under and drop a look. And you could avoid this problem easily. A rusted underbody is not a Micras` problem. This is lazy owners` problem who park their cars at snowbanks.

16th Sep 2009, 21:34

I believe you just got a bad one. Mine is a '92 K11 chassis, same as yours, but mine has not rusted that bad at all. Maybe the person you bought it off drove it on the beach a lot or lived near the sea, as salt water would rust it a lot quicker.

Mine has electric windows, mirrors, PAS and AC. It is a Japanese import so I believe that's why.

I did a review of mine if anyone wants to view it, it's under Nissan Micra A# 1.3 Twin Cam.

Brilliant cars.

20th Mar 2012, 16:48

Yup, I think you just got a bad one too. I bought my wife a '98 Micra in 2003, and it has never put a foot wrong. Apart from the expected service items (oil, etc) and a set of tyres, I've only had to replace the battery. Not a spot of rust to be found, and that includes under the rear seats where I had occasion to look recently.

It's hardly an exciting car, but it has thoroughly endeared itself to us over the years, and we have no intention of getting rid of it for the foreseeable future.

Average review marks: 6.8 / 10, based on 10 reviews