BMW X3 2004 vs Nissan X-Trail 2003
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 192 HP | 165 HP | |
| Torque: | 245 NM | 230 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 11.1 seconds | |
|
BMW X3 is more dynamic to drive. BMW X3 engine produces 27 HP more power than Nissan X-Trail, whereas torque is 15 NM more than Nissan X-Trail. Thanks to more power BMW X3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 12.0 | 9.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 14.0 l/100km | 11.5 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan X-Trail is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW X3 consumes 2.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW X3 could require 360 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW X3 consumes 2.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 67 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 550 km in combined cycle | 620 km in combined cycle | |
| 740 km on highway | 750 km on highway | ||
| 470 km with real consumption | 520 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan X-Trail gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 25 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW Z4 | Used also on Nissan Sentra | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The BMW X3 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: | 4.56 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.67 m | 1.68 m | |
|
BMW X3 is larger, but slightly lower. BMW X3 is 5 cm longer than the Nissan X-Trail, 9 cm wider, while the height of BMW X3 is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 480 litres | 410 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1560 litres | 1841 litres | |
| BMW X3 has 70 litres more trunk space than the Nissan X-Trail. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 281 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW X3 is 1.4 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`270 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | average | |
| BMW X3 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Nissan X-Trail, so BMW X3 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 4600 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW X3 has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |