Mazda Tribute 2004 vs Nissan X-Trail 2003
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
---|---|---|---|
Engines: | 2.3 - 3.0 (petrol) | 2.0 - 2.5 (petrol, diesel) | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 150 - 203 HP | 136 - 165 HP | |
Torque: | 200 - 262 NM | 192 - 314 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 - 10.7 seconds | 9.9 - 13.1 seconds | |
Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.4 - 11.8 | 7.1 - 10.0 | |
Mazda Tribute petrol engines consumes on average 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than 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: | 4.42 m | 4.51 m | |
Width: | 1.82 m | 1.76 m | |
Height: | 1.74 m | 1.70 m | |
Mazda Tribute is 9 cm shorter than the Nissan X-Trail, 6 cm wider, while the height of Mazda Tribute is 5 cm higher. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 461 litres | 410 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2245 litres | 1841 litres | |
Mazda Tribute has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Mazda Tribute has 51 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 Mazda Tribute (by 404 litres). | |||
Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 10.6 meters | |
The turning circle of the Mazda Tribute is 0.6 metres more than that of the Nissan X-Trail, which means Mazda Tribute can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`010 | ~ 2`009 | |
Safety: | no data | no data | |
Quality: | no data | average | |
Average price (€): | 2800 | 2600 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Mazda Tribute has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |