Jaguar F-Pace 2015 vs Nissan X-Trail 2017
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 180 HP | 130 HP | |
| Torque: | 430 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.7 seconds | 11.4 seconds | |
|
Jaguar F-Pace is more dynamic to drive. Jaguar F-Pace engine produces 50 HP more power than Nissan X-Trail, whereas torque is 110 NM more than Nissan X-Trail. Thanks to more power Jaguar F-Pace reaches 100 km/h speed 2.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.3 | 5.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.2 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
|
The Jaguar F-Pace is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Jaguar F-Pace consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jaguar F-Pace could require 30 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Jaguar F-Pace consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1130 km in combined cycle | 1170 km in combined cycle | |
| 1270 km on highway | 1270 km on highway | ||
| 830 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Ground clearance: | 213 mm (8.4 inches) | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Jaguar XF, Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, Jaguar XE, Land Rover Discovery Sport | 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.73 m | 4.69 m | |
| Width: | 2.07 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.65 m | 1.71 m | |
|
Jaguar F-Pace is larger, but lower. Jaguar F-Pace is 4 cm longer than the Nissan X-Trail, 25 cm wider, while the height of Jaguar F-Pace is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 508 litres | 550 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
650 litres | 1877 litres | |
|
Nissan X-Trail has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Jaguar F-Pace has 42 litres less trunk space than the Nissan X-Trail. This could mean that the Jaguar F-Pace uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 1227 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.3 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jaguar F-Pace is 1.1 metres more than that of the Nissan X-Trail, which means Jaguar F-Pace can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`460 | 2`310 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 30 800 | 21 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jaguar F-Pace has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |