BMW X3 2017 vs Nissan X-Trail 2017
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 190 HP | 130 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8 seconds | 11.4 seconds | |
|
BMW X3 is more dynamic to drive. BMW X3 engine produces 60 HP more power than Nissan X-Trail, whereas torque is 80 NM more than Nissan X-Trail. Thanks to more power BMW X3 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 5.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
|
By specification BMW X3 consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW X3 could require 45 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, BMW X3 consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1200 km in combined cycle | 1170 km in combined cycle | |
| 1580 km on highway | 1270 km on highway | ||
| 890 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Ground clearance: | 204 mm (8 inches) | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 330'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 6 sērija, BMW X4 | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Scenic, Renault Megane | |
| 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. | |||
| BMW X3 2017 2.0 engine: A fairly reliable engine with a long service life. On the whole, the chains are more reliable than in the BMW N-series engines, but they also have a tendency to stretch under heavy use. The engine needs to be ... More about BMW X3 2017 2.0 engine Nissan X-Trail 2017 1.6 engine: This 1.6-liter diesel engine is a joint development by Renault-Nissan engineers. It features a cast-iron block, a 16-valve cylinder head with hydraulic lifters, a chain-driven timing system, and a Bosch Common ... More about Nissan X-Trail 2017 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.71 m | 4.69 m | |
| Width: | 1.89 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.71 m | |
|
BMW X3 is larger, but slightly lower. BMW X3 is 2 cm longer than the Nissan X-Trail, 7 cm wider, while the height of BMW X3 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 550 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1600 litres | 1877 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW X3 is 0.8 metres more than that of the Nissan X-Trail, which means BMW X3 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`420 | 2`310 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | low | |
| BMW X3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan X-Trail has serious deffects in 65 percent more cases than BMW X3, so BMW X3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 28 400 | 19 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW X3 has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |