2009 Mazda 3 vs. 2010 Nissan X-Trail
To start off, 2010 Nissan X-Trail is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 Mazda 3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 Mazda 3 would be higher. At 1,998 cc, 2009 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Nissan X-Trail (148 HP) has 3 more horse power than 2009 Mazda 3. (145 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Nissan X-Trail should accelerate faster than 2009 Mazda 3.
Because 2010 Nissan X-Trail is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Mazda 3. 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:
| 2009 Mazda 3 | 2010 Nissan X-Trail | |
| Make | Mazda | Nissan |
| Model | 3 | X-Trail |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1998 cc | 1995 cc |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 145 HP | 148 HP |
| Acceleration 0-100mph | 9.8 seconds | 10 seconds |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4640 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1790 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1690 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2640 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.6 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 65 L |
