Nissan X-Trail 2003 vs Land Rover Freelander 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 HP | 112 HP | |
| Torque: | 314 NM | 260 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.5 seconds | 14.4 seconds | |
|
Nissan X-Trail is more dynamic to drive. Nissan X-Trail engine produces 24 HP more power than Land Rover Freelander, whereas torque is 54 NM more than Land Rover Freelander. Thanks to more power Nissan X-Trail reaches 100 km/h speed 2.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 7.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan X-Trail is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Freelander, which means that by driving the Nissan X-Trail over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Freelander. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 59 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 750 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan X-Trail gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Nissan Almera, Nissan Primera, Nissan Almera Tino | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan X-Trail might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Land Rover Freelander engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.51 m | 4.45 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.71 m | |
| Nissan X-Trail is 6 cm longer than the Land Rover Freelander, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan X-Trail is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 410 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1841 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan X-Trail is 1 metres less than that of the Land Rover Freelander, which means Nissan X-Trail can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`050 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Land Rover Freelander has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan X-Trail has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Land Rover Freelander, so Land Rover Freelander quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2800 | 3200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.1/10 | 7.6/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan X-Trail has
|
Land Rover Freelander has
| |