Nissan X-Trail 2017 vs BMW X3 2017
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 177 HP | 190 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 8 seconds | |
|
BMW X3 is a more dynamic driving. Nissan X-Trail engine produces 13 HP less power than BMW X3, whereas torque is 20 NM less than BMW X3. Due to the lower power, Nissan X-Trail reaches 100 km/h speed 2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.1 | 5.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km | |
|
The BMW X3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan X-Trail could require 105 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 980 km in combined cycle | 1200 km in combined cycle | |
| 1030 km on highway | 1580 km on highway | ||
| 750 km with real consumption | 890 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X3 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) | |
| Ground clearance: | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | 204 mm (8 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Opel Vivaro | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 6 sērija, BMW X4 | |
| 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. | |||
| Nissan X-Trail 2017 2.0 engine: The engine has a good power to fuel consumption ratio and, with careful maintenance, a long service life. The most common problems with these engines are with the fuel injection system and lubrication. BMW X3 2017 2.0 engine: A fairly reliable engine with a long service life. On the whole, the chains are more reliable than in the BMW N-series engines, but they also have a tendency to stretch under heavy use. The engine needs to be ... More about BMW X3 2017 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.69 m | 4.71 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.68 m | |
|
Nissan X-Trail is smaller, but slightly higher. Nissan X-Trail is 2 cm shorter than the BMW X3, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan X-Trail is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 550 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1877 litres | 1600 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan X-Trail is 0.8 metres less than that of the BMW X3, which means Nissan X-Trail can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`400 | 2`420 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | average | |
| BMW X3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan X-Trail has serious deffects in 65 percent more cases than BMW X3, so BMW X3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 21 000 | 29 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan X-Trail has
|
BMW X3 has
| |