Nissan X-Trail 2014 vs BMW X3 2014
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 130 HP | 190 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.4 seconds | 8.1 seconds | |
|
BMW X3 is a more dynamic driving. Nissan X-Trail engine produces 60 HP less power than BMW X3, whereas torque is 80 NM less than BMW X3. Due to the lower power, Nissan X-Trail reaches 100 km/h speed 3.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 | 5.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.2 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan X-Trail is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3, which means that by driving the Nissan X-Trail over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 67 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1170 km in combined cycle | 1280 km in combined cycle | |
| 1270 km on highway | 1340 km on highway | ||
| 830 km with real consumption | 880 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | 204 mm (8 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Scenic, Renault Megane | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 1 sērija, 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. Nissan X-Trail might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.64 m | 4.66 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.66 m | |
|
Nissan X-Trail is smaller, but higher. Nissan X-Trail is 2 cm shorter than the BMW X3, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan X-Trail is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 550 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1877 litres | 1600 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan X-Trail is 0.7 metres less than that of the BMW X3, which means Nissan X-Trail can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`310 | 2`365 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| BMW X3 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Nissan X-Trail, so BMW X3 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 12 800 | 20 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan X-Trail has
|
BMW X3 has
| |