Mitsubishi Outlander 2004 vs Nissan X-Trail 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 201 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 303 NM | 192 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.7 seconds | 11.3 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Outlander is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Outlander engine produces 61 HP more power than Nissan X-Trail, whereas torque is 111 NM more than Nissan X-Trail. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Outlander reaches 100 km/h speed 3.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.1 | 9.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.5 l/100km | 10.7 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan X-Trail is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Outlander consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Outlander could require 120 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Outlander consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 580 km in combined cycle | 640 km in combined cycle | |
| 770 km on highway | 780 km on highway | ||
| 470 km with real consumption | 560 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan X-Trail gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 330'000 km | 280'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mitsubishi Outlander engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mitsubishi Eclipse | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Nissan Primera, Nissan Serena, Nissan Sentra | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mitsubishi Outlander 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: | 4.54 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.62 m | 1.68 m | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander is 3 cm longer than the Nissan X-Trail, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Outlander is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 402 litres | 410 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1705 litres | 1841 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Mitsubishi Outlander has 8 litres less trunk space than the Nissan X-Trail. This could mean that the Mitsubishi Outlander 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 136 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Outlander is 0.8 metres more than that of the Nissan X-Trail, which means Mitsubishi Outlander can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`070 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 2600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.5/10 | 7.1/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Outlander has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |