Subaru Outback 2013 vs Nissan X-Trail 2016
| Body: | Estate car / wagon | 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: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 177 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 9.4 seconds | |
|
Nissan X-Trail is a more dynamic driving. Subaru Outback engine produces 27 HP less power than Nissan X-Trail, whereas torque is 30 NM less than Nissan X-Trail. Due to the lower power, Subaru Outback reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | no data | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 60 litres | |
| 950 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 17 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Subaru Forester, Subaru Legacy | 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Nissan X-Trail 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. | |||
| Nissan X-Trail 2016 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: | 4.79 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.61 m | 1.72 m | |
| Subaru Outback is 15 cm longer than the Nissan X-Trail, width is practically the same , while the height of Subaru Outback is 11 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 526 litres | 135 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1877 litres | |
|
Subaru Outback has more luggage capacity. Subaru Outback has 391 litres more trunk space than the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Subaru Outback is 0.2 metres less than that of the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`100 | 2`350 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 17 400 | 11 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Subaru Outback has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |