Nissan X-Trail 2005 vs Toyota RAV4 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 192 NM | 192 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.3 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
| Nissan X-Trail engine produces 10 HP less power than Toyota RAV4, the torque is the same for both cars. Despite less power, Nissan X-Trail reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.1 | 8.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.1 l/100km | 9.7 l/100km | |
|
By specification Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota RAV4, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan X-Trail could require 45 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota RAV4. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 57 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 640 km in combined cycle | |
| 810 km on highway | 780 km on highway | ||
| 590 km with real consumption | 580 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Toyota RAV4 2003: Toyota has full-time all wheel drive with viscous coupling locking center differential and can have optional Torsen limited-slip rear differential. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Nissan Primera, Nissan Serena, Nissan Sentra | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Avensis Verso | |
| 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. | |||
| Toyota RAV4 2003 2.0 engine: The 2.0-liter gasoline engine debuted in 2000 as a replacement for the 3S-FE. It features an aluminum block with cast-iron liners and an open cooling jacket, an aluminum 16-valve DOHC cylinder head without hydraulic lifters, and a chain-driven timing system. Most versions of ... More about Toyota RAV4 2003 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.51 m | 4.26 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.72 m | |
| Nissan X-Trail is 25 cm longer than the Toyota RAV4, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan X-Trail is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 410 litres | 400 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1841 litres | 1150 litres | |
| Nissan X-Trail has 10 litres more trunk space than the Toyota RAV4. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 691 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | 1`825 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Toyota RAV4 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan X-Trail has serious deffects in 60 percent more cases than Toyota RAV4, so Toyota RAV4 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2600 | 3200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.1/10 | 8.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan X-Trail has
|
Toyota RAV4 has
| |