2003 BMW X3 vs. 2010 Nissan X-Trail
To start off, 2010 Nissan X-Trail is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 BMW X3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 BMW X3 would be higher. At 2,995 cc (6 cylinders), 2003 BMW X3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 BMW X3 (201 HP) has 53 more horse power than 2010 Nissan X-Trail. (148 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2003 BMW X3 should accelerate faster than 2010 Nissan X-Trail.
Both vehicles are four wheel drive (4WD) - it offers better handling, traction, and control in all driving conditions compared with front wheel drive or rear wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. 2003 BMW X3 has automatic transmission and 2010 Nissan X-Trail has manual transmission. 2010 Nissan X-Trail will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2003 BMW X3 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
2003 BMW X3 | 2010 Nissan X-Trail | |
Make | BMW | Nissan |
Model | X3 | X-Trail |
Year Released | 2003 | 2010 |
Body Type | SUV | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2995 cc | 1995 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 201 HP | 148 HP |
Acceleration 0-100mph | 8.2 seconds | 10 seconds |
Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4570 mm | 4640 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1790 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1680 mm | 1690 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2730 mm | 2640 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 9.1 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 67 L | 65 L |