BMW X3 2014 vs Nissan X-Trail 2014
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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: | 8.1 seconds | 11 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 2.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.2 | 5.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 7.0 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan X-Trail is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification BMW X3 consumes 0.1 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 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, BMW X3 consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 67 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1280 km in combined cycle | 1130 km in combined cycle | |
| 1340 km on highway | 1250 km on highway | ||
| 880 km with real consumption | 850 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| 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: | 11 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 1 sērija, BMW 2 sērija | 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 2014 2.0 engine: Pretty reliable engine with great resource. Overall, the chains are more reliable than in BMW N-series engines, but also tend to stretch under heavy use. The engine requires good quality fuel, maintenance and ... More about BMW X3 2014 2.0 engine Nissan X-Trail 2014 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 2014 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.66 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.66 m | 1.71 m | |
|
BMW X3 is larger, but lower. BMW X3 is 2 cm longer than the Nissan X-Trail, 6 cm wider, while the height of BMW X3 is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 550 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1600 litres | 1877 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW X3 is 0.7 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`365 | 2`320 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | below 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 (€): | 20 400 | 11 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW X3 has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |