Nissan X-Trail 2010 vs Subaru Forester 2011
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 173 HP | 147 HP | |
| Torque: | 360 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
Nissan X-Trail is more dynamic to drive. Nissan X-Trail engine produces 26 HP more power than Subaru Forester, whereas torque is 10 NM more than Subaru Forester. Thanks to more power Nissan X-Trail reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.7 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Subaru Forester is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Subaru Forester, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan X-Trail could require 15 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Subaru Forester. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1010 km in combined cycle | 1010 km in combined cycle | |
| 1180 km on highway | 1140 km on highway | ||
| 840 km with real consumption | 920 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Opel Vivaro | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Subaru Outback, Subaru Legacy | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Nissan X-Trail engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.64 m | 4.56 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.70 m | 1.70 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Nissan X-Trail is 8 cm longer than the Subaru Forester, 1 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 479 litres | 450 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1773 litres | no data | |
|
Nissan X-Trail has more luggage capacity. Nissan X-Trail has 29 litres more trunk space than the Subaru Forester. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan X-Trail is 1 metres more than that of the Subaru Forester, which means Nissan X-Trail can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`170 | 2`050 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Subaru Forester has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan X-Trail has serious deffects in 65 percent more cases than Subaru Forester, so Subaru Forester quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8600 | 6000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan X-Trail has
|
Subaru Forester has
| |