The ones to look for are the late model 12 or 62 plate E11's with 1600cc HRDE engine as it has a proper torque converter 4 speed auto not the CVT of the 1300cc version.

I'm confused by this statement!.

First, I'm not aware of any Micra designated E11 (they always start with "K"). Second, I'm not aware of any 1300cc Micra (manual or auto). Third, 12 or 62 plate is circa 2012/13, which in Micra terms would make it a K13 (2010-2017), only available with a 1.2 (n/a or supercharged) and the auto was a CVT.

E11 is a Note. 1.6 engine is the HR16DE.

It is fair to say that the best recommendation for a K11 Micra auto probably is something else...

E11 is a Note. 1.6 engine is the HR16DE.

......and the 1.6 auto Note is really good. It's a reliable proper torque converter auto box with a "proper" reliable Nissan engine. Surprisingly roomy and refined car - highly recommended.

Except of course they are getting old as well now (newest would be 2013) and there is no way the OP would get one for £2000 that actually moved.

Since the OP's "friend" is "less confident on the roads now" getting a car that is quite a bit bigger than a K11 Micra would probably not be a good move.

An E12 Micra would be way more than the OP's budget and with a plasticine CVT box potentially very expensive to run.

* I would avoid the 00-03 Micras because, in my view, Nissan started to seriously scrimp on the build quality (Renault influence?) - most of the very increasingly limited model range were low spec and seemingly used poor quality trim - both interior and exterior, plus poor quality paintwork, especially on the bumpers

Don't agree with that at all.

We had 2 K12 Micras, a 1.2 S from September 2005 to March 2008 and a 1.2 Acenta from November 2007 to June 2015, a total of 10 years and 2 months and total of about 62,000 miles.

In that time the only issues we had were a boot release switch (warranty) and a broken front spring at 7 years old. All MOT's passed. The dash and door trim in the 2007 car was an improvement over the 2005 car but in reality it was exactly what you would expect for a car of its type and no worse than the others we looked at. The seat trim was fine in both.

After 7 years and 7 months the paint and trim was spot on and I had no trouble selling it on Autotrader for a good price within 24 hours of placing the listing.

In truth both were as good in every respect as the Japanese built 1996 Nissan Almera that my Dad owned for a total of 6 years and 7 months. All that had was a door locking cylinder under warranty.

Skidpan - the Micra I was referring to was the run-out K11 (00-02), not the K12 (03-10) and was correctly stated in my comments. They dropped all but the lowest spec models and the quality of the plastics (dash and especially bumpers) and paintwork went downhill. I saw several examples over the years with peeling paintwork after just a few years, something I never saw in earlier versions at the same age.

The engines were essentially the same, except with the 1.3 being increased to 1.4.

The K12 was a completely newly-engineered car - which I wasn't commenting on. The confusion might've been because the K12 was introduced the same year (2003) as the K11 finished.

classics.honestjohn.co.uk/reviews/nissan/micra-k11/

Edited by Engineer Andy on 23/10/2023 at 18:54

Fully aware you are referring to your K11. But it's your boring rhetoric that all Nissans are r****** because of the Renault collaboration. Our K12's had zero contact with Renault. Its engine was Nissan as was the gearbox. There was I believe joint floor pan design shared with the Clio but nothing wrong with that.

Just give up.

What, because your ego demands it? No. I'm not 'going after' Nissan, given my ownership experience with my K11 (well into the Renault Alliance) was decent. There's a very good reason why sales of this car tanked in comparison to its predecessor and rivals - it wasn't very good, and nor was the version that followed.

Even if Nissan's engines were there, some 'influence' on the design of the K12 (especially as regards design cost or the seemingly poor electrics - a common theme in French cars back then) if not parts could've been shared.

The last one was seemingly a significant improvement - which was on the same platform as the Clio.

The HJ Review for the K12 was hardly what you'd call one that inspired people to buy one:

www.honestjohn.co.uk/nissan/micra/2003/

2 out of 5 stars and lots of 'issues'. Similarly for the next version:

www.honestjohn.co.uk/nissan/micra/2010/

I do remember Richard Hammond on Top Gear giving the K12 a 'good' review video until he got back into the studio, when the already numerous reliability problems came to light. He looked embarrassed after recommending it 30 seconds before.

Your one might've been fine, but this can be said of almost all cars - obviously none are 100% unreliable.

Your one might've been fine, but this can be said of almost all cars - obviously none are 100% unreliable.

Clearly you have not read my post. We had TWO and both were 100% reliable (ie never let us down in the 10 years we had them).

Wow - two! How many were sold nationally? What's two divided by tens of thousands as a percentage? I'm going by the Good and Bad section on HJ plus the review, which is far more of a representative sample than 'just two'. Great that yours proved reliable.

Unfortunately that doesn't have much bearing as to the OP's query, given the cars will be quite a bit older now, and they would have to contend with the varying standards of care from other owners - assuming they bought your ones, which is highly unlikely.

I actually see more K11s still about (surprising, given the rust issues they suffered from, mine included) than K12s, which were far less popular, and the following version even more so.