Nissan X-Trail 2003 vs Mitsubishi Outlander 2003
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 165 HP | 160 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 213 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.1 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
| Nissan X-Trail engine produces 5 HP more power than Mitsubishi Outlander, whereas torque is 17 NM more than Mitsubishi Outlander. Thanks to more power Nissan X-Trail reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.6 | 10.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.5 l/100km | 10.8 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Outlander is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means that by driving the Nissan X-Trail over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 59 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 580 km in combined cycle | |
| 750 km on highway | 730 km on highway | ||
| 520 km with real consumption | 540 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 25 years | 22 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Nissan Sentra | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Galant, Mitsubishi Grandis, Mitsubishi Eclipse | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.51 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.62 m | |
| Nissan X-Trail is 3 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Outlander, 1 cm wider, while the height of Nissan X-Trail is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 410 litres | 402 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1841 litres | 1705 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Nissan X-Trail has 8 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Outlander. The Mitsubishi Outlander may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 136 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan X-Trail is 0.8 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means Nissan X-Trail can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | 2`070 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2600 | 1800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.1/10 | 8.5/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan X-Trail has
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has
| |