Opel Frontera 2001 vs Nissan X-Trail 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 120 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 280 NM | 314 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Nissan X-Trail is a more dynamic driving. Opel Frontera engine produces 16 HP less power than Nissan X-Trail, whereas torque is 34 NM less than Nissan X-Trail. Due to the lower power, Opel Frontera reaches 100 km/h speed 2.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.5 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.7 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan X-Trail is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Opel Frontera consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Opel Frontera could require 195 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Opel Frontera consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 740 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan X-Trail gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Opel Omega, Opel Sintra | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Nissan Almera, Nissan Primera, Nissan Almera Tino | |
| 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 Opel Frontera 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: | 4.66 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.74 m | 1.68 m | |
|
Opel Frontera is larger. Opel Frontera is 15 cm longer than the Nissan X-Trail, 3 cm wider, while the height of Opel Frontera is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 389 litres | 410 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1790 litres | 1841 litres | |
|
Nissan X-Trail has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Opel Frontera has 21 litres less trunk space than the Nissan X-Trail. This could mean that the Opel Frontera 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 51 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.5 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Opel Frontera is 0.9 metres more than that of the Nissan X-Trail, which means Opel Frontera can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`450 | 2`050 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Nissan X-Trail has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Opel Frontera has serious deffects in 235 percent more cases than Nissan X-Trail, so Nissan X-Trail quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Opel Frontera has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |