Mazda CX-5 2012 vs Nissan X-Trail 2016
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 177 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.2 seconds | 9.4 seconds | |
| Mazda CX-5 engine produces 27 HP less power than Nissan X-Trail, the torque is the same for both cars. Despite less power, Mazda CX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.6 | no data | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 56 litres | 60 litres | |
| 810 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Nissan X-Trail 2014: It has selectable four-wheel drive with Auto, 2WD and Lock modes. In Auto mode, it has front-wheel drive under normal conditions, the rear axle engages when the front wheels start to slip, and power is distributed variably up to 50:50 front to rear. In 2WD mode, the transfer clutch is permanently unlocked, but the electronic control unit can engage the rear wheels occasionally, for example during hard acceleration. In Lock mode, the transfer clutch is permanently locked, providing a constant 50:50 power distribution. When vehicle speed increases above 30 km/h (20 mph), it switches to Auto mode, but when speed decreases, it switches back to Lock mode. The system also switches to 2WD mode in the event of overheating. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3, Mazda CX-7 | 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Nissan X-Trail 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. | |||
| 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: | 4.54 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.72 m | |
| Mazda CX-5 is 10 cm shorter than the Nissan X-Trail, 2 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 505 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 370 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: | 11.2 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`035 | 2`350 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | Nissan X-Trail has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mazda CX-5, so Nissan X-Trail quality could be a bit better. | ||
| Average price (€): | 8800 | 11 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-5 has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |