Mitsubishi Outlander 2018 vs Nissan X-Trail 2017
| Comparing electrical vehicle (EV) with combustion engine (ICE) one is a complex task, but we are doing our best. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.4 Hybrid | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Hybrid engines (Mitsubishi Outlander) excel in urban environments with superior fuel efficiency and lower emissions during stop-and-go driving. Diesel engines (Nissan X-Trail), however, are more fuel-efficient on long highway trips and provide greater torque for towing and heavy loads. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 135 HP | 177 HP | |
| Torque: | 211 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 9.4 seconds | |
|
Nissan X-Trail is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Outlander engine produces 42 HP less power than Nissan X-Trail, whereas torque is 169 NM less than Nissan X-Trail. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Outlander reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Consumption: | 1.8 l/100km | 5.6 l/100km | |
| Fuel cost per 100km: | no data | 10.90 € | |
|
Change fuel prices per unit to adjust the calculation to the fuel prices in your country. Diesel€/l | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 2500 km in combined cycle | 1070 km in combined cycle | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 190 mm (7.5 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. | |||
| Nissan X-Trail 2017 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: | 4.70 m | 4.69 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.71 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mitsubishi Outlander and Nissan X-Trail are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 463 litres | 550 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1602 litres | 1877 litres | |
|
Nissan X-Trail has more luggage space. Mitsubishi Outlander has 87 litres less trunk space than the Nissan X-Trail. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 275 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Outlander is 0.6 metres less than that of the Nissan X-Trail, which means Mitsubishi Outlander can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`390 kg | 2`350 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`880 kg | 1`680 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 510 kg | 670 kg | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 31 procentiem less than Nissan X-Trail. Therefore, Nissan X-Trail is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 19 800 | 24 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Outlander has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |