2005 Rover 25 vs. 2003 Nissan X-Trail
To start off, 2005 Rover 25 is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Nissan X-Trail. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Nissan X-Trail would be higher. At 1,998 cc (4 cylinders), 2003 Nissan X-Trail is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Nissan X-Trail (143 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 60 more horse power than 2005 Rover 25. (83 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Nissan X-Trail should accelerate faster than 2005 Rover 25. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Nissan X-Trail weights approximately 200 kg more than 2005 Rover 25. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2003 Nissan X-Trail (192 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 82 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Rover 25. (110 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2003 Nissan X-Trail will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Rover 25.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Rover 25 | 2003 Nissan X-Trail | |
Make | Rover | Nissan |
Model | 25 | X-Trail |
Year Released | 2005 | 2003 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1396 cc | 1998 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 83 HP | 143 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 110 Nm | 192 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1085 kg | 1285 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2510 mm | 2540 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 50 L | 60 L |