Nissan X-Trail 2016 vs Mazda CX-5 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 177 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Nissan X-Trail is more dynamic to drive. Nissan X-Trail engine produces 27 HP more power than Mazda CX-5, the torque is the same for both cars. Thanks to more power Nissan X-Trail reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | no data | 5.3 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 56 litres | |
| 730 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 5 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 Mazda 6, Mazda 3, Mazda CX-7 | |
| 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. | |||
| Nissan X-Trail 2016 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: | 4.64 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.71 m | |
| Nissan X-Trail is 10 cm longer than the Mazda CX-5, 2 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 135 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1877 litres | 1620 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Nissan X-Trail has 370 litres less trunk space than the Mazda CX-5. This could mean that the Nissan X-Trail uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 257 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`330 | 2`050 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | Nissan X-Trail has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mazda CX-5, so Nissan X-Trail quality could be a bit better. | ||
| Average price (€): | 11 800 | 8800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan X-Trail has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |