Ford EcoSport 2017 vs Nissan X-Trail 2003

Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison

 
Ford EcoSport
2017 -
Nissan X-Trail
2003 - 2007
Gearbox: Manual/AutomaticManual/Automatic
Engines: 1.0 - 2.02.0 - 2.5

Performance

Power: 100 - 166 HP136 - 165 HP
Torque: 170 - 250 NM192 - 314 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 10.7 - 14 seconds9.9 - 13.1 seconds
Select a car version for a more accurate comparison!

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 4.1 - 5.87.1 - 10.0
Ford EcoSport petrol engines consumes on average 4.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than Nissan X-Trail. On average, Ford EcoSport equipped with diesel engines consume 3.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail.
This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version!

Dimensions

Length: 4.10 m4.51 m
Width: 1.77 m1.76 m
Height: 1.65 m1.70 m
Ford EcoSport is 41 cm shorter than the Nissan X-Trail, width is practically the same , while the height of Ford EcoSport is 5 cm lower.
Trunk capacity: 356 litres410 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
1238 litres1841 litres
Nissan X-Trail has more luggage space.
Ford EcoSport has 54 litres less trunk space than the Nissan X-Trail. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 603 litres).
Turning diameter: 10.6 meters10.6 meters
Gross weight (kg): ~ 1`751~ 2`009
Safety: no datano data
Quality:
above average

average
Average price (€): 14 8002600
Pros and Cons: Ford EcoSport has
  • lower fuel consumption
  • fewer faults
Nissan X-Trail has
  • roomier boot
  • lower price
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv