Nissan Kicks 2024 1.6 S vs 300 Challenger 2.0T Comparison
Review Comparison
Positive
- Modern and trend compliant design
- High fuel economy for efficiency
- Effective use of internal space
Negative
- Engine performance is limited
- Slow transmission response
- The quality of interior materials is average
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Price Comparison
SAR 75338
SAR 149327
SAR 72486
SAR 143635
SAR 1014
SAR 2010
Fuel Consumption Comparison
0.06 L/KM
0.1 L/KM
Daily Fule Payment
SAR 11.49
Daily Fule Payment
SAR 19.15
Weekly Fule Payment
SAR 80.43
Weekly Fule Payment
SAR 134.05
Monthly Fule Payment
SAR 356.19
Monthly Fule Payment
SAR 593.65
Yearly Fule Payment
SAR 4193.85
Yearly Fule Payment
SAR 6989.75
Hide common specs
Car Information
Engine / Motor
180
200 km/h
4
4
/
1998 cc
/
Chinese
Dimensions
5 Seater
5 Seater
4295
4760 mm
1760
1930 mm
1590
1927 mm
2620
2750 mm
432
400 L
/
5 Doors
/
224 m
Fuel Economy
15.4
10 Km/L
41
75 L
/
10 Km/L
Comfort
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Keyless Entry
Interior
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
/
✓
/
✓
/
Leather
/
Digital
/
Dual Zone
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Electric
/
✓
/
Standard
Safety
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Infotainment
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
/
12.3
/
✓
/
✓
/
Android LCD
/
✓
/
9
Transmission
✓
/
Automatic
Automatic
Chassis & Steering
Front Wheel Drive
Four Wheel Drive
Wheels/brakes
✓
/
✓
/
Exterior
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
LED
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Engine
1.6 L
2.0 L
Gasoline
Gasoline
118 BHP
224 BHP
149
387 Nm
/
In-Line
/
Single Turbo
/
4
Technologies
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
.png?x-oss-process=image/format,webp/interlace,1/quality,q_70/resize,w_750)
.png?x-oss-process=image/format,webp/interlace,1/quality,q_70/resize,w_750)