Nissan X-Trail 2017 vs Mazda CX-5 2017
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 177 HP | 175 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 420 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 9.5 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is a more dynamic driving. Nissan X-Trail engine produces 2 HP more power than Mazda CX-5, but torque is 40 NM less than Mazda CX-5. Despite the higher power, Nissan X-Trail reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.1 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda CX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan X-Trail could require 45 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 980 km in combined cycle | 1000 km in combined cycle | |
| 1030 km on highway | 1090 km on highway | ||
| 750 km with real consumption | 760 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | 193 mm (7.6 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Nissan X-Trail can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Opel Vivaro | Used also on Mazda 6 | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.69 m | 4.55 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.68 m | |
| Nissan X-Trail is 14 cm longer than the Mazda CX-5, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan X-Trail is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 506 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1877 litres | 1620 litres | |
|
Nissan X-Trail has more luggage capacity. Nissan X-Trail has 44 litres more trunk space than the Mazda CX-5. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 257 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan X-Trail is 0.2 metres more than that of the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`400 | 2`143 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Mazda CX-5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan X-Trail has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Mazda CX-5, so Mazda CX-5 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 21 000 | 24 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan X-Trail has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |