2005 Mazda 6 vs. 2010 Nissan X-Trail
To start off, 2010 Nissan X-Trail is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Mazda 6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Mazda 6 would be higher. At 2,966 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Mazda 6 (220 HP) has 72 more horse power than 2010 Nissan X-Trail. (148 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 2010 Nissan X-Trail.
Because 2010 Nissan X-Trail is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2005 Mazda 6. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Nissan X-Trail will offer significantly more control. 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Mazda 6 | 2010 Nissan X-Trail | |
| Make | Mazda | Nissan |
| Model | 6 | X-Trail |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2966 cc | 1995 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 220 HP | 148 HP |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4750 mm | 4640 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1790 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1690 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2630 mm | 2640 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.7 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 65 L |
