Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012 vs Nissan X-Trail 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 129 HP | 173 HP | |
| Torque: | 300 NM | 360 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.2 seconds | 10 seconds | |
|
Nissan X-Trail is a more dynamic driving. Suzuki Grand Vitara engine produces 44 HP less power than Nissan X-Trail, whereas torque is 60 NM less than Nissan X-Trail. Due to the lower power, Suzuki Grand Vitara reaches 100 km/h speed 3.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.8 | 6.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 7.7 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan X-Trail is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Suzuki Grand Vitara consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Suzuki Grand Vitara could require 60 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Suzuki Grand Vitara consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 66 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 970 km in combined cycle | 1010 km in combined cycle | |
| 1100 km on highway | 1180 km on highway | ||
| 830 km with real consumption | 840 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 205 mm (8.1 inches) | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Megane | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Opel Vivaro | |
| 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 Nissan X-Trail 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: | 4.30 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.70 m | 1.70 m | |
| Suzuki Grand Vitara is 34 cm shorter than the Nissan X-Trail, 2 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 398 litres | 479 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1773 litres | |
|
Nissan X-Trail has more luggage space. Suzuki Grand Vitara has 81 litres less trunk space than the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki Grand Vitara is 0.6 metres less than that of the Nissan X-Trail, which means Suzuki Grand Vitara can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`170 | 2`170 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 5800 | 8600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki Grand Vitara has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |