BMW X3 2006 vs Nissan X-Trail 2007
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 500 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.7 seconds | 12.5 seconds | |
|
BMW X3 is more dynamic to drive. BMW X3 engine produces 68 HP more power than Nissan X-Trail, whereas torque is 180 NM more than Nissan X-Trail. Thanks to more power BMW X3 reaches 100 km/h speed 4.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 8.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.9 l/100km | 8.9 l/100km | |
|
The BMW X3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW X3 consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail, which means that by driving the BMW X3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 67 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 870 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 1040 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 750 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| 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) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 201 mm (7.9 inches) | 200 mm (7.9 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 3 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW X5 | 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. | |||
| BMW X3 2006 3.0 engine: The BMW M57 engine is regarded as one of the best German-built power units. Its inline-six layout is praised for reliability, and cars equipped with this engine are often more desirable on the used market. Despite delivering ... More about BMW X3 2006 3.0 engine Nissan X-Trail 2007 2.0 engine: The engine has a good power to fuel consumption ratio and, with careful maintenance, a long service life. The most common problems with these engines are with the fuel injection system and lubrication. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.57 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.67 m | 1.68 m | |
| BMW X3 is 6 cm shorter than the Nissan X-Trail, 7 cm wider, while the height of BMW X3 is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 480 litres | 479 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1560 litres | 1742 litres | |
| BMW X3 has 1 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 182 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW X3 is 1.2 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`355 | 2`170 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| BMW X3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan X-Trail has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than BMW X3, so BMW X3 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5800 | 4200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW X3 has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |