Nissan X-Trail 2001 vs Mitsubishi Outlander 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 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: | 140 HP | 160 HP | |
| Torque: | 192 NM | 213 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.3 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Outlander is a more dynamic driving. Nissan X-Trail engine produces 20 HP less power than Mitsubishi Outlander, whereas torque is 21 NM less than Mitsubishi Outlander. Due to the lower power, Nissan X-Trail reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.3 | 10.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.6 l/100km | 10.8 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan X-Trail is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.8 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 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan X-Trail consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 59 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 640 km in combined cycle | 580 km in combined cycle | |
| 770 km on highway | 730 km on highway | ||
| 620 km with real consumption | 540 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan X-Trail 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 | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 480'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mitsubishi Outlander engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 22 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Nissan Primera, Nissan Serena, 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. Mitsubishi Outlander might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
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: | 11 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan X-Trail is 0.4 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: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 1800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan X-Trail has
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has
| |