Nissan X-Trail 2001 vs Mitsubishi Outlander 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Nissan X-Trail) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Mitsubishi Outlander) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 114 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 270 NM | 176 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.7 seconds | 11.4 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Outlander is a more dynamic driving. Nissan X-Trail engine produces 22 HP less power than Mitsubishi Outlander, but torque is 94 NM more than Mitsubishi Outlander. Due to the lower power, Nissan X-Trail reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 9.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 9.7 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 Mitsubishi Outlander, 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 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 59 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 620 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 770 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 600 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) | |
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, if possible |
1841 litres | 1705 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: | 2`050 kg | 1`995 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`534 kg | 1`540 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 516 kg | 455 kg | |
| Nissan X-Trail load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 12 procentiem more than Mitsubishi Outlander. Therefore, Nissan X-Trail is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 1800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan X-Trail has
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has
| |