Land Rover Range Rover 2002 vs Nissan X-Trail 2003
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.9 Diesel | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 177 HP | 165 HP | |
| Torque: | 390 NM | 230 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.6 seconds | 11.1 seconds | |
| Land Rover Range Rover engine produces 12 HP more power than Nissan X-Trail, whereas torque is 160 NM more than Nissan X-Trail. Despite the higher power, Land Rover Range Rover reaches 100 km/h speed 2.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.3 | 9.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.2 l/100km | 11.5 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan X-Trail is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Land Rover Range Rover consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Range Rover could require 255 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Land Rover Range Rover consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 100 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 880 km in combined cycle | 620 km in combined cycle | |
| 1060 km on highway | 750 km on highway | ||
| 810 km with real consumption | 520 km with real consumption | ||
| Land Rover Range Rover 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: | 4 years | 25 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | 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. Nissan X-Trail might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Land Rover Range Rover 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: | 4.95 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.96 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.68 m | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is larger. Land Rover Range Rover is 44 cm longer than the Nissan X-Trail, 20 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover is 14 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 410 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1841 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover is 1 metres more than that of the Nissan X-Trail, which means Land Rover Range Rover can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`500 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 5800 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |