Mazda CX-5 2017 vs Nissan X-Trail 2016
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 175 HP | 177 HP | |
| Torque: | 420 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 10 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda CX-5 engine produces 2 HP less power than Nissan X-Trail, but torque is 40 NM more than Nissan X-Trail. Despite less power, Mazda CX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | no data | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 60 litres | |
| 760 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 193 mm (7.6 inches) | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Nissan X-Trail can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda 6 | 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. | |||
| Nissan X-Trail 2016 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: | 4.55 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.72 m | |
| Mazda CX-5 is 9 cm shorter than the Nissan X-Trail, 2 cm wider, while the height of Mazda CX-5 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 506 litres | 135 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1620 litres | 1877 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Mazda CX-5 has 371 litres more trunk space than the Nissan X-Trail. The Nissan X-Trail may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 257 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda CX-5 is 0.2 metres less than that of the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`143 | 2`400 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Mazda CX-5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan X-Trail has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Mazda CX-5, so Mazda CX-5 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 24 400 | 11 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-5 has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |