Opel Antara 2011 vs Nissan X-Trail 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 173 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 360 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 10 seconds | |
| Opel Antara engine produces 10 HP less power than Nissan X-Trail, whereas torque is 10 NM less than Nissan X-Trail. Despite less power, Opel Antara reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.3 | 6.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 7.7 l/100km | |
|
By specification Opel Antara consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail, which means that by driving the Opel Antara over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Opel Antara consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1030 km in combined cycle | 1010 km in combined cycle | |
| 1250 km on highway | 1180 km on highway | ||
| 850 km with real consumption | 840 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Nissan X-Trail 2010: It has selectable four-wheel drive with Auto, 2WD and Lock modes. In Auto mode, it has front-wheel drive under normal conditions, the rear axle engages when the front wheels start to slip, and power is distributed variably up to 50:50 front to rear. In 2WD mode, the transfer clutch is permanently unlocked, but the electronic control unit can engage the rear wheels occasionally, for example during hard acceleration. In Lock mode, the transfer clutch is permanently locked, providing a constant 50:50 power distribution. When vehicle speed increases above 30 km/h (20 mph), it switches to Auto mode, but when speed decreases, it switches back to Lock mode. The system also switches to 2WD mode in the event of overheating. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Chevrolet Captiva | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Opel Vivaro | |
| 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 2010 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: | 4.60 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.76 m | 1.70 m | |
| Opel Antara is 4 cm shorter than the Nissan X-Trail, 6 cm wider, while the height of Opel Antara is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 419 litres | 479 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1773 litres | |
|
Nissan X-Trail has more luggage space. Opel Antara has 60 litres less trunk space than the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.3 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Opel Antara is 0.7 metres more than that of the Nissan X-Trail, which means Opel Antara can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`505 | 2`170 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 7800 | 8600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Opel Antara has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |