Mitsubishi Pajero 2000 vs Nissan X-Trail 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 100 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 314 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 17.8 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Nissan X-Trail is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Pajero engine produces 36 HP less power than Nissan X-Trail, whereas torque is 74 NM less than Nissan X-Trail. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Pajero reaches 100 km/h speed 6.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.6 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.3 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan X-Trail is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Pajero consumes 3.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Pajero could require 510 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Pajero consumes 2.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 71 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 660 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 780 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 680 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 | |||
| Engine production duration: | 30 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mitsubishi L 200 | 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.26 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.84 m | 1.68 m | |
| Mitsubishi Pajero is 25 cm shorter than the Nissan X-Trail, 8 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Pajero is 16 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 410 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1841 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`800 | 2`050 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Nissan X-Trail has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Pajero has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Nissan X-Trail, so Nissan X-Trail quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4000 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Pajero has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |