DETAILED CAR COMPARISON

2002 Audi TT vs 2003 Nissan Cedric Comparison

Compare technical specifications, scores and everyday-use differences side by side.

VS
WINNER

Nissan Cedric

Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 1 points.

80.75–81.75
SPECIFICATION GROUPS

Every difference between the two cars

Basic Specifications

AudiMakeNissan
TTModelCedric
2002Model year2003
CoupeBody typeSedan
2+2Seats5
2Doors4

Performance

6,4 s0–100 km/h—
235 km/hTop speed220 km/h
3189 ccEngine displacement2987 cc
250 HPPower280 HP
320 NmTorque387 Nm
6Cylinders6

Fuel & Consumption

PetrolFuel typePetrol
62 ltFuel tank80 lt
14,9 ltUrban consumption18 lt
8,1 ltExtra-urban consumption11 lt
10,6 ltAverage consumption—

Transmission & Chassis

4x4DrivetrainRear-wheel drive
6Gears4
225/45 R17Tyre size205/60 R16 H
YesABSYes

Dimensions

4041 mmLength4860 mm
1764 mmWidth1770 mm
1345 mmHeight1450 mm
1520 KgWeight1660 Kg
2429 mmWheelbase2800 mm

E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note

2002 Audi TT and 2003 Nissan Cedric approach the same decision from different angles. We compare the exact versions so changes in engine, transmission, dimensions and equipment are not hidden behind the model names.

Overall, Nissan Cedric leads the E-Kıyasla score by 1 points. The score provides a consistent summary, while the best choice can still change with priorities such as urban efficiency, luggage space, performance or equipment.

SIMILAR COMPARISONS

Similar comparisons

Explore related comparisons featuring cars from this matchup.

Comments are loading…