Nissan X-Trail 2014 vs Subaru Forester 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 144 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 200 NM | 198 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 11.8 seconds | |
|
Nissan X-Trail is more dynamic to drive. Nissan X-Trail engine produces 6 HP less power than Subaru Forester, but torque is 2 NM more than Subaru Forester. Despite less power, Nissan X-Trail reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 6.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.3 l/100km | 8.2 l/100km | |
|
The Subaru Forester is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Subaru Forester, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan X-Trail could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan X-Trail consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Subaru Forester. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 920 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 1090 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
| Subaru Forester gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Subaru Forester engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Nissan Serena | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Subaru Impreza, Subaru Legacy, Subaru XV | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Subaru Forester might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.64 m | 4.60 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.74 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Nissan X-Trail is 5 cm longer than the Subaru Forester, 3 cm wider, while the height of Nissan X-Trail is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 497 litres | 505 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Nissan X-Trail has 8 litres less trunk space than the Subaru Forester. This could mean that the Nissan X-Trail uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan X-Trail is 0.6 metres more than that of the Subaru Forester, which means Nissan X-Trail can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`990 | 2`015 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Average price (€): | 13 000 | 17 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan X-Trail has
|
Subaru Forester has
| |