Subaru Forester 2016 vs Nissan X-Trail 2014
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Subaru Forester is available only with four wheel (4x4) drive, while Nissan X-Trail can be equipped with front wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive. All-wheel drive models tend to consume more fuel, so if you don't need off road capabilities, Nissan X-Trail also offers 2-wheel drive versions for fuel economy. 2WD versions also have lower maintenance costs. | |||
| Engines: | 2.0 - 2.5 | 1.6 - 2.5 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 147 - 241 HP | 130 - 177 HP | |
| Torque: | 198 - 350 NM | 200 - 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.5 - 11.8 seconds | 9.4 - 12.1 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 - 8.5 | 4.9 - 8.3 | |
|
Subaru Forester petrol engines consumes on average 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than Nissan X-Trail. On average, Subaru Forester equipped with diesel engines consume 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 220 mm (8.7 inches) | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Subaru Forester can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.61 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.74 m | 1.71 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Subaru Forester is 3 cm shorter than the Nissan X-Trail, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Subaru Forester is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 505 litres | 550 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1564 litres | 1982 litres | |
|
Nissan X-Trail has more luggage space. Subaru Forester has 45 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 418 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Subaru Forester is 0.2 metres more than that of the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Gross weight: | ~ 2`056 kg | ~ 2`195 kg | |
| Net weight: | ~ 1`591 kg | ~ 1`571 kg | |
| Load capacity: | ~ 465 kg | ~ 624 kg | |
| Subaru Forester load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 34 procentiem less than Nissan X-Trail. Therefore, Nissan X-Trail is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 11 200 | 8600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Subaru Forester has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |