Previously, if you were upwardly mobile, had just got married,
with new family to visit on the other side of the country, a baby on the way…
and a dog, you’d buy a classic three-box saloon from a long-established manufacturer.
Now, nearly everybody wants an MPV. Which makes the three cars tested here very
annoyed. And also makes them try much harder.
Nissan’s face-lifted Almera replaces a car that has gone down well with fleet
buyers (especially the car rental market), but has generally failed to fire
the private buyer’s imagination. The same can be said of the Astra, which, considering
its ability, has been hugely underestimated. No such problem for the Corolla,
though: people can’t get enough of them.
All three of these cars have multivalve 1,8-litre engines, all three are packed
with equipment, and all three sell for just over R180 000. And, most importantly,
all three want you to forget about the Renault Scénic, the Citroën
Picasso, etc.
Design
Almera
Astra
Corolla
OK, so none will win any beauty pageants – one tongue-in-cheek description being
bland (Corolla), more bland (Astra) and most bland (Almera).
The Nissan’s facelift entails exactly that – a fresh visage with new headlamps,
slightly reworked grille, smoother bumpers and mesh-covered air intakes. The
test team generally agreed that it looks better now, more modern and, to some,
more distinctive. Pity, then, that the rest of the car didn’t get any attention.
The rear is the same, save for a slightly different bumper that most won’t notice.
The Corolla and Astra are slightly more adventurous – the bedazzled-looking
Corolla’s grille/bonnet “hump” and the Astra’s chiselled lines ensuring
that the amorphous tag can’t be as easily attached here as on the Nissan. The
Astra is becoming dated now, but, surprisingly perhaps, was judged to be the
prettiest of the three… the Corolla losing out because the front and rear
ends don’t quite gel.
The Astra has the longest wheelbase, but is the shortest overall, whereas the
Almera is the longest but has the shortest wheelbase. Confused? Well, it’s not
over yet, because the “inbetween” Corolla has the biggest cabin. It
offers the best leg- and headroom all-round, the Astra is second best and the
Nissan comes third.
Since these cars will be bought mostly by young executives with small families,
utility space is vitally important. It is therefore hard to understand why Nissan
would specify the Almera without folding rear seats. Sure, the Nissan has the
biggest boot (400 dm3), but the Corolla’s boot space (360 dm3) can be extended
to 1 008 dm3 by folding the seats, and the Astra’s from 368 to 998 dm3.
With its dual-tone cream and black interior, the Corolla is visually the most
pleasing. It also quite obviously has the most modern facia. The green-on-white
instrumentation looks much classier than you’d think; quality is top notch and
the hangdown section very neat. One criticism is the volume button on the radio/CD
front loader, which requires quite a stretch to reach.
The Astra has benefited from a noticeable recent quality upgrade. Materials
seem to be from a grade or two higher than before, and it just all fits together
a bit better. None of the testers liked the grey cloth upholstery though, commenting
that it would show wear and dirt quickly.
The Almera’s leather trimmed cabin is very dark. We liked some parts of
the facia design – the facia-top mounted lidded bin and the suede trim on the
doors, for example – but wondered why Nissan decided to do away with the perfectly
good and attractive built-in audio system. Fit and finish in the Nissan were
of a high standard, the only jarring note being struck by an odd mix of plastic
grades.
Powertrain
Almera
Astra
Corolla
Toyota’s VVT-i (variable valve timing-intelligent) 1,8-litre 16-valver delivers
100 kW at 6 000 r/min and 171 N.m of torque at a comparatively high 4 200. The
Astra’s outputs are 92 kW at 5 600 r/min and 170 N.m at 3 800, which promises
greater driveability. The Almera’s engine, carried over unchanged, features Nissan’s
NVCS valve timing control system, and produces 88 kW at 6 000 r/min and 161 N.m
at 4 400 – that’s even higher revs than the Corolla. Our test unit’s engine sounded
very rough, almost as if unwilling to deliver its power.
All three cars channel their power to the front wheels via five-speed manual
gearboxes. The Corolla’s gearshift action was the most heavily criticised. Although
similar in feel to its predecessor, the shift action is very mechanical and,
for some, too stiff. But in similar fashion to the six- speed RunX RSi, it becomes
better when changes are done aggressively.
The Almera’s shift is sticky at first and in normal driving, but also
becomes better when “manhandled”, while the Astra has that typical
“rubbery” Opel feel.
The Astra is the most soothing to drive. Its throttle, clutch and gearshift
actions are almost unnoticeable, whereas a missed gear here or there (Corolla),
or rough sounding engine (Almera) may irritate. The Almera’s drivetrain could
do with more refinement all round – when the foot is lifted off accelerator,
the gearlever jumps up and down, and even at cruising speeds it vibrates, sending
a tingling feeling through the driver’s hand.
Comfort and features
Almera
Opel
Corolla
With its bigger cabin, the Corolla has a head start here. The lighter tone of
the cream leather and lower facia further enhances the feeling of space. The
Astra isn’t much smaller than the Corolla inside, but it feels noticeably narrower,
while the Almera’s limited rear legroom may be a problem. None of these cars
has uncomfortable seats. In keeping with the Astra’s more relaxed nature, it
has the softest chairs, the Corolla has the hardest, and the Almera the best
compromise between support and comfort. All three cars offer height-adjustable
driver’s seats.
The Astra has the most problem-free driving position, while our tallest tester
struggled to get entirely comfortable behind the wheel of the Corolla and Almera,
mostly because their driver’s seats do not move back far enough.
Standard specification on the Almera includes; power steering, electric windows
(auto down on driver’s side), air-conditioning, height-adjustable steering wheel,
radio/CD front loader, dual front airbags, electric mirror adjustment and remote
central locking.
The Corolla and Astra match the Almera’s equipment list, but the Opel
has one or two little details that make life just a little bit easier – one-touch
up and down for all four windows, remote audio controls on the steering wheel,
and cruise control. It also offers side airbags. However, it loses points because
the doors unlock only after the key has been pulled out, a frustrating characteristic
of Opel’s currentline-up of cars.
Performance and braking
Almera
Astra
Corolla
With its higher power output the Corolla was always going to be difficult to beat.
Its 9,44 seconds zero-to-100 km/h sprint time is easily better than its two rivals.
But the Opel has the highest top speed (207 km/h compared with the 203 of the
Corolla). The Astra was the slowest to 100 km/h, recording 10,82 seconds.
Compared with the car we evaluated in November 2001, this Almera was rather
unimpressive on the test strip. The 191km/h top speed is on target, but things
went pear shaped on the acceleration runs. The benchmark sprint took 10,54 seconds
(compared with the 10,11 of the previous model). It was also slower in every
split time during our overtaking acceleration runs. We have to point out that
our test unit had only 1 450 km on the clock, whereas the previous test car
had done almost double that.
The Astra and Corolla are very equal on overtaking acceleration, the Toyota
generally coming out on top, but the Opel is victorious in the important 100-120km/h
split, in every gear. The Astra has the best brakes, its ABS system clocking
up a 2,9 seconds average stopping time in our simulated emergency braking test.
The Almera (ABS, EBD and brake assist) achieved a good 3,04 seconds, and the
Corolla (ABS and EBD) a slightly disappointing 3,13. Brake feel was rated as
good on the Nissan and Opel, although notes on the comment sheets included “too
soft in feel” for the Almera and “spongy” for the Opel. But the
Toyota came in for the most flak, some testers describing its biting action
as not being progressive enough, resulting in an “all-or-nothing”
feel for some.
Fuel economy
Almera
Astra
Corolla
The Opel’s 8,73 litres/100 km fuel index figure makes it the economy champ. This
figure translates to 11,45 km per litre and a range of just under 600 km on the
smallest (52 litre) tank of the three. The Corolla’s fuel index figure worked
out to 9,83 litres/100 km – too high, we would say, but still good enough to give
the Toyota second place. The Almera guzzled fuel at the rate of 10,3 litres/100
km, up significantly over its predecessor – a fact that convinced us that the
engine fitted to our test unit was not up to Nissan’s usual standard. Both Japanese
cars have 60-litre tanks – the Almera’s range is 582 kilometres (9,71 km/litre),
and the Toyota’s 610 kilometres (10,17 km/litre).
Ride and handling
Almera
Astra
Corolla
Three very similar suspension systems, but three very different cars come the
first corner. All have MacPherson struts in the front and a torsion beam set-up
at the back. Anti-roll bars are fitted to all three cars. If you’re an enthusiastic
driver, the Toyota is the best. It’s got a firmer ride and better body control
through the twisties. Steering is reasonably quick and feedback, though not
electrifying, is at least present, which is more than can be said of its rivals.
The Astra ride is the softest, and can be compared with French cars of old.
It absorbs bumps brilliantly and has a smoothness that makes it the best highway
cruiser here. It’s also quite good in corners. Because of the soft set-up, there’s
some pitching and weaving, but it does grip, and the understeer is easily remedied
by lifting. As we’ve become used to by now, the electro-mechanical power steering
is not generous with feedback.
In terms of ride quality, the Almera again slots in between the two, being
stiffer than the Opel, but softer than the Toyota. Unfortunately, the Nissan’s
suspension system is not as good at absorbing bumps and smoothing broken surfaces
as the Opel’s. It tends to start bouncing, generally feeling a little rubbery
on anything other than smooth surfaces. Also, the car displays less than impressive
body control around corners, and does not like direction changes under braking.
Value for money
Almera
Astra
Corolla
The Toyota (R183 740) is the cheapest here, and also offers the highest quality.
Service intervals are pegged at 15 000 km and it comes with Toyota’s 5 year/90
000 km ToyotaCare service plan. Nissan has priced the Almera at R180 950, and
service intervals match the Corolla’s. The Nissan maintenance plan stretches
only up to 3 years/50 000 km. The most expensive of the three, the Astra (R189
870), has a 5 year/100 000 fixed cost maintenance plan and service intervals
are also set at 15 000 km.
Our opinion is that, despite its fairly high fuel consumption, the Corolla
would be the cheapest car to own in the long run. In this competition, it offers
the best value for money. Nissan also has a solid reputation for reliability,
and the Almera should not prove expensive to run – again despite its high fuel
consumption.
