Nissan X-Trail
Nissan X-Trail technical data
Select Nissan X-Trail generation for full details - reviews, specifications, fuel consumption, pricing, quality and safety features, options, photos and more
Is Nissan X-Trail a reliable car?
The Nissan X-Trail is not a very reliable car. 70% of other cars of the same age are found to have fewer defects than the Nissan X-Trail in annual roadworthiness tests.
Based on annual roadworthiness tests results, the Nissan X-Trail generation produced from 2001 to 2003 received the highest reliability ratings, while the models produced from 2017 had the lowest reliability ratings, reliability scores vary quite significantly between generations of Nissan X-Trail. For more information, check the respective generation information.
Most Nissan X-Trail engines are chain-driven, which is considered more reliable than belt-driven engines.
Nissan X-Trail reviews
Total 46 Nissan X-Trail owner reviews
| Purchase year: | 2018 (new car) | Owned for: | 6`000 kilometers (1 year) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average fuel consumption: | 6.1 litres per 100km (60% urban driving) | ||
Would recomend this car to the friend
Pros: I bought a Nissan X-Trail, 4Wd with a 2.0 Diesel 177hp. In my experience, the average fuel consumption is 6.1 liters / 100 km, which is very much dependent on the season and driving style. There was no problem with the boot. The sound insulation seems to be sufficient and, as far as I know, it can be further improved by replacing the tires or finishing with a special mass.
| Purchase year: | 2021 (age of car 16 years) | Owned for: | 1`000 kilometers (0 years) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average fuel consumption: | 6.5 litres per 100km (70% urban driving) | ||
Would recomend this car to the friend
Pros: Since this is my first time driving an all-wheel drive car of this type, I had to test both on the highway and on gravel roads. So the first impression on the highway is stable, well-visible, comfortable sitting, a good boost is generally brisk.
Cons: Plastic rattles in the trunk compartment when driving on a gravel road.
Sound insulation quite weak.
| Purchase year: | 2011 (age of car 4 years) | Owned for: | 27`000 kilometers (5 years) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average fuel consumption: | 8.9 litres per 100km (90% urban driving) | ||
Would recomend this car to the friend
Pros: A comfortable sitting position, a very good ventilation and conditioning. Ideal clearance to pass not only for mushrooms in woods, but also not afraid to break a bumper at a supermarket parking border.
Cons: The trunk of compartment door, which are made of plastic and tends to rattle, but with small rubber scrap label, no problems.
| Purchase year: | 2019 (age of car 15 years) | Owned for: | 20`000 kilometers (1 year) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average fuel consumption: | 8.9 litres per 100km (40% urban driving) | ||
| Total cost of repairs: | 1332 $ (~ 1332 $ per year) | ||
Would recomend this car to the friend
Pros: Machine is like tank. Relatively comfortable on the road, but at the same time very good driving next to the road and even in complete mud.
The car is very spacious. The engine is powerful and has no problems.
Cons: Rust. You will have to fight it. Fuel consumption could also be slightly lower.
| Purchase year: | 2014 (age of car 9 years) | Owned for: | 8`000 kilometers (3 years) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average fuel consumption: | 6.0 litres per 100km (40% urban driving) | ||
| Total cost of repairs: | 222 $ (~ 74 $ per year) | ||
Would recomend this car to the friend
Pros: Spare parts for cheap. Maintenance also.
Good traficability, I'm a fisherman was driving in difficult circumstances.
Relatively low fuel consumption compared to other crossovers.
Cons: Rear window wiper pin yonder ruttin 'on, after dismantling, grease is walking again.
| Purchase year: | 2017 (age of car 12 years) | Owned for: | 34`000 kilometers (2 years) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average fuel consumption: | 7.0 litres per 100km (70% urban driving) | ||
| Total cost of repairs: | 265.29 $ (~ 132 $ per year) | ||
Would recomend this car to the friend
Pros: The price / quality ratio is excellent.The passability is very good, almost like an SUV. Good lubricants and good fuel and no problems. The gear is strong.
Cons: The sound insulation is horrible, and it doesn't exist. The muffler's constructor probably worked drunk.
| Purchase year: | 2011 (age of car 5 years) | Owned for: | 60`000 kilometers (6 years) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average fuel consumption: | 9.0 litres per 100km (60% urban driving) | ||
| Total cost of repairs: | 4240.2 $ (~ 706 $ per year) | ||
Would recomend this car to the friend
Pros: The relatively dynamic, easy to manoeuvre.
Handsome, easy get in and get out.
Good visibility of road.
Don't have to afraid to get to street border.
Roomy interior and cargo space.
Cons: A sizable fuel consumption, bit hard suspension