Audi A3 2009 vs Nissan X-Trail 2005
| Body: | Cabrio | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 250 NM | 192 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.2 seconds | 10.3 seconds | |
|
Nissan X-Trail is a more dynamic driving. Audi A3 engine produces 35 HP less power than Nissan X-Trail, but torque is 58 NM more than Nissan X-Trail. Due to the lower power, Audi A3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 9.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.4 l/100km | 10.1 l/100km | |
|
The Audi A3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Audi A3 consumes 3.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail, which means that by driving the Audi A3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 555 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Audi A3 consumes 4.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1010 km in combined cycle | 650 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km with real consumption | 590 km with real consumption | ||
| Audi A3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.24 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.68 m | |
| Audi A3 is 27 cm shorter than the Nissan X-Trail, width is practically the same , while the height of Audi A3 is 26 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 260 litres | 410 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
674 litres | 1841 litres | |
|
Nissan X-Trail has more luggage space. Audi A3 has 150 litres less trunk space than the Nissan X-Trail. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 1167 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Audi A3 is 0.1 metres more than that of the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`930 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | average | |
| Audi A3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan X-Trail has serious deffects in 290 percent more cases than Audi A3, so Audi A3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6200 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi A3 has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |