Nissan Pulsar 2014 vs BMW X1 2015
| Body: | Hatchback | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| 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: | 110 HP | 190 HP | |
| Torque: | 260 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.5 seconds | 7.6 seconds | |
|
BMW X1 is a more dynamic driving. Nissan Pulsar engine produces 80 HP less power than BMW X1, whereas torque is 140 NM less than BMW X1. Due to the lower power, Nissan Pulsar reaches 100 km/h speed 3.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 3.6 | 4.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.1 l/100km | 6.3 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Pulsar is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Pulsar consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW X1, which means that by driving the Nissan Pulsar over 15,000 km in a year you can save 195 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Pulsar consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW X1. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 61 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1270 km in combined cycle | 1240 km in combined cycle | |
| 1390 km on highway | 1380 km on highway | ||
| 900 km with real consumption | 960 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
BMW X1 2015: This generation BMW has Haldex Generation V proactive automatic four-wheel drive system which sends 100% of the torque to the front wheels by default. The system analyzes input from the ABS and engine control units and can increase pressure on the multi-disc clutch for faster engagement when needed. When wheel spin is detected, torque can be split evenly between the axles (50%/50%). | |||
| Ground clearance: | 156 mm (6.1 inches) | 183 mm (7.2 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, BMW X1 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: | 8 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 22 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster, Nissan Juke | Used also on BMW 2 sērija | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The BMW X1 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 Pulsar 2014 1.5 engine: The engine has many modifications, is sufficiently common and spare parts are available. The fuel consumption/power ratio is good. The fuel injection system can be a problem and the timing belt change interval ... More about Nissan Pulsar 2014 1.5 engine BMW X1 2015 2.0 engine: Pretty reliable engine with great durability. Overall, the chains are more reliable than on BMW N-series engines. However, they do tend to stretch under heavy use. The engine needs good quality fuel, ... More about BMW X1 2015 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.39 m | 4.44 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.60 m | |
|
Nissan Pulsar is smaller. Nissan Pulsar is 5 cm shorter than the BMW X1, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Pulsar is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 385 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1395 litres | 1550 litres | |
|
BMW X1 has more luggage space. Nissan Pulsar has 120 litres less trunk space than the BMW X1. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in BMW X1 (by 155 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Pulsar is 1.2 metres less than that of the BMW X1, which means Nissan Pulsar can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`785 | 2`145 | |
| Safety: | |||
| BMW X1 scores higher in safety tests. The BMW X1 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Nissan Pulsar has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW X1 has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Nissan Pulsar, so Nissan Pulsar quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7200 | 17 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Pulsar has
|
BMW X1 has
| |