Nissan X-Trail 2001 vs Suzuki Grand Vitara 1999
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
---|---|---|---|
Engines: | 2.0 - 2.5 | 1.6 - 2.0 | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 114 - 165 HP | 94 - 128 HP | |
Torque: | 192 - 270 NM | 138 - 270 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 - 13.7 seconds | 13.2 seconds | |
Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 - 10.0 | 7.3 - 9.8 | |
Nissan X-Trail petrol engines consumes on average 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than Suzuki Grand Vitara. On average, Nissan X-Trail equipped with diesel engines consume 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Grand Vitara. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.51 m | 3.92 m | |
Width: | 1.76 m | 1.78 m | |
Height: | 1.68 m | 1.74 m | |
Nissan X-Trail is 59 cm longer than the Suzuki Grand Vitara, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan X-Trail is 6 cm lower. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 410 litres | 258 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1841 litres | 828 litres | |
Nissan X-Trail has more luggage capacity. Nissan X-Trail has 152 litres more trunk space than the Suzuki Grand Vitara. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 1013 litres). | |||
Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 9.4 meters | |
The turning circle of the Nissan X-Trail is 1.6 metres more than that of the Suzuki Grand Vitara, which means Nissan X-Trail can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`010 | ~ 1`600 | |
Safety: | no data | ||
Quality: | above average | above average | |
Average price (€): | 2000 | 2400 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Nissan X-Trail has
|
Suzuki Grand Vitara has
| |