2006 Mazda 2 vs. 2003 Nissan X-Trail
To start off, 2006 Mazda 2 is newer by 3 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 44 more horse power than 2006 Mazda 2. (99 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Nissan X-Trail should accelerate faster than 2006 Mazda 2. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Nissan X-Trail weights approximately 130 kg more than 2006 Mazda 2. 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 46 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda 2. (146 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2003 Nissan X-Trail will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mazda 2.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Mazda 2 | 2003 Nissan X-Trail | |
Make | Mazda | Nissan |
Model | 2 | X-Trail |
Year Released | 2006 | 2003 |
Body Type | Hatchback | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1596 cc | 1998 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 99 HP | 143 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 146 Nm | 192 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1155 kg | 1285 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2500 mm | 2540 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 45 L | 60 L |