2006 Chevrolet SSR vs. 2010 Nissan X-Trail
To start off, 2010 Nissan X-Trail is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Chevrolet SSR. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Chevrolet SSR would be higher. At 5,965 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Chevrolet SSR is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Chevrolet SSR (401 HP) has 253 more horse power than 2010 Nissan X-Trail. (148 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Chevrolet SSR 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 2006 Chevrolet SSR. 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:
| 2006 Chevrolet SSR | 2010 Nissan X-Trail | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Nissan |
| Model | SSR | X-Trail |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Pickup | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5965 cc | 1995 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 401 HP | 148 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4640 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2000 mm | 1790 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1630 mm | 1690 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2950 mm | 2640 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.8 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 95 L | 65 L |
