Nissan X-Trail 2003 vs Nissan Pathfinder 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Nissan X-Trail) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Nissan Pathfinder) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Double-row timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 165 HP | 174 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 403 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 12.3 seconds | |
| Nissan X-Trail engine produces 9 HP less power than Nissan Pathfinder, whereas torque is 173 NM less than Nissan Pathfinder. Despite less power, Nissan X-Trail reaches 100 km/h speed 2.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 | 9.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.1 l/100km | 9.2 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Pathfinder is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Pathfinder, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan X-Trail could require 60 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan X-Trail consumes 1.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Pathfinder. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 630 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 780 km on highway | 1050 km on highway | ||
| 540 km with real consumption | 860 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan Pathfinder gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| 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: | 26 years | 28 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Nissan Sentra | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Nissan Navara, Nissan Murano | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Pathfinder might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.51 m | 4.74 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.78 m | |
|
Nissan X-Trail is smaller. Nissan X-Trail is 23 cm shorter than the Nissan Pathfinder, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan X-Trail is 10 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 410 litres | 515 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 515 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 410 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1841 litres | 2091 litres | |
| The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Pathfinder (by 250 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 12.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan X-Trail is 1.8 metres less than that of the Nissan Pathfinder, which means Nissan X-Trail can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`000 kg | 2`793 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`470 kg | 2`132 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 530 kg | 661 kg | |
| Nissan X-Trail load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 25 procentiem less than Nissan Pathfinder. Therefore, Nissan Pathfinder is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 5400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan X-Trail has
|
Nissan Pathfinder has
| |