2004 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 2010 Nissan X-Trail
To start off, 2010 Nissan X-Trail is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Chevrolet Tracker would be higher. At 2,491 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Chevrolet Tracker is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Chevrolet Tracker (165 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 28 more horse power than 2010 Nissan X-Trail. (137 HP @ 5200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Chevrolet Tracker should accelerate faster than 2010 Nissan X-Trail.
Let's talk about torque, 2004 Chevrolet Tracker (221 Nm) has 23 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Nissan X-Trail. (198 Nm). This means 2004 Chevrolet Tracker will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Nissan X-Trail.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Chevrolet Tracker | 2010 Nissan X-Trail | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Nissan |
| Model | Tracker | X-Trail |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
| Body Type | SUV | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2491 cc | 1997 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 165 HP | 137 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 221 Nm | 198 Nm |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4140 mm | 4640 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1790 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1670 mm | 1690 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2490 mm | 2640 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 65 L |
