Nissan X-Trail 2014 vs Audi Q5 2013
Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
---|---|---|---|
Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 2.0 Petrol | |
Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 130 HP | 180 HP | |
Torque: | 320 NM | 320 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 8.5 seconds | |
Audi Q5 is a more dynamic driving. Nissan X-Trail engine produces 50 HP less power than Audi Q5, the torque is the same for both cars. Due to the lower power, Nissan X-Trail reaches 100 km/h speed 2.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.3 | 7.5 | |
Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 9.0 l/100km | |
The Nissan X-Trail is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan X-Trail consumes 2.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Audi Q5, which means that by driving the Nissan X-Trail over 15,000 km in a year you can save 330 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan X-Trail consumes 2.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Audi Q5. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 75 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 1130 km in combined cycle | 1000 km in combined cycle | |
1250 km on highway | 1170 km on highway | ||
860 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
Nissan X-Trail gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Ground clearance: | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | 200 mm (7.9 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. | |||
Engines | |||
Engine production duration: | 13 years | 6 years | |
Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Scenic, Renault Megane | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Audi A4, Audi A5 | |
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 | 4.63 m | |
Width: | 1.82 m | 1.90 m | |
Height: | 1.71 m | 1.66 m | |
Nissan X-Trail is 1 cm longer than the Audi Q5, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan X-Trail is 6 cm higher. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 540 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1877 litres | 1560 litres | |
Nissan X-Trail has 10 litres more trunk space than the Audi Q5. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 317 litres). | |||
Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 11.6 meters | |
The turning circle of the Nissan X-Trail is 0.4 metres less than that of the Audi Q5, which means Nissan X-Trail can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | 2`320 | 2`330 | |
Safety: | no data | no data | |
Quality: | below average | high | |
Audi Q5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan X-Trail has serious deffects in 65 percent more cases than Audi Q5, so Audi Q5 quality is probably significantly better | |||
Average price (€): | 12 800 | 26 800 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Nissan X-Trail has
|
Audi Q5 has
| |