9621 Agnes Crossing, Lake Suzanneview, New Mexico Island 84604-9295.
If you focus solely on the technical features of the Nissan X-Trail and Subaru Forester, you will undoubtedly find both cars very similar in their handling characteristics by
So what have we got. Two purebred Japanese medium crossovers. Yes, not with the latest, but quite modern hardware in the design. Both the Nissan X-Trail and Subaru Forester have four-wheel drive transmissions with a CVT and 2.5 liter naturally aspirated petrol. The power of the Nissan is 171 horsepower. Of. The Subarik has 185 horsepower under the hood. Of.
The slightly larger (approximately 70 kg) curb weight of the Forester partly compensates for its energy advantage of 14 hp. Of. Comparing the looks of two SUVs is generally meaningless. They have such different designs. Which of the two “crosses” is more stylish and beautiful – you can only judge based on your own (and biased!) sense of beauty.
Just look at the photos of these cars: all such a “sharply faceted” X-Trail front end and, unlike the more sedate and archaic (with the exception, perhaps, of block headlight shape), Forester “muzzle”. But Nissan’s “feed” (as far as I’m concerned) is a bit more banal than that of a Subaru competitor. But again, this is my opinion. I’m sure a bunch of people like to “hate” this point of view. And thank goodness: long live “taste” in aesthetics and bias in perception. Only their remains save us the opportunity to enjoy the variety of appearance of cars of different brands …
As for the interiors of Forester and X-Trail, with all the desire to maintain a tolerant attitude in the spirit of “everyone has the right to exist”, it will not be possible. Salon “Ixtrail” in comparison with the “Forester” looks pale. If it’s not cheap. And it’s not even about the finishing materials – let’s leave them outside the brackets. Just take a look at Nissan’s “needle” instrument panel and imagine Subaru’s color “instruments” display next to it.
What would you most like to look forward to, say, three to five years after purchasing a crossover, until it’s time to trade it in for a new car? Personally, I prefer a more modern monitor. Although this is not a “display board” from left to right roof rack, like the German and even the Chinese “premium”. Whatever the case may be, the Forester’s interior looks much more modern and solid.
There are two identical monitors on the center console. In Subaru, the top one is responsible for the climate and other “service”, and the bottom one for multimedia. Nissan only has one monitor. With an accentuated fresh design. No, there are more than useful options in X-Trail and Forester. Everything that should be in a modern car and even more. Cameras, electrical adjustments, drives … But at the same time, the interior of the X-Trail looks poorer, while the Subaru has something “in a mature way”.
And on the road, the cars make a very different impression. In the beginning, in a banal “overclocking” test, the X-Trail made a winning impression. Starts with a traffic light on it, albeit subjectively, is definitely more cheerful. Although the stated technical characteristics claim that it is not him, but the Forester that accelerates to 100 km / h a whole second faster – in 9.5 seconds versus 10.5 for the X-Trail. Apparently Nissan’s “brain” of the engine and CVT are set for a more dynamic start from a standstill. But then the work of the Subarik units is perceived much better than that of the X. Fact: The Forester CVT is tuned more finely.
The Subarovskaja transmission shifts minimally when accelerating and braking. No driving back and forth, neither in a traffic jam nor in a choppy driving mode. Almost perfect job. And Subaru’s suspension wins, too, albeit a little bit. The X-Trail also leans more into turns and behaves more sloppily on bumps. Forester, on the other hand, closes and gathers along the gullies…
Compared to the X-Trail, the Forester handlebars are also more “mature”, as it were, with sufficient feedback. In other words, the Subaru Forester feels more confident on the road than the Nissan X-Trail.
But both cars “guzzle” gasoline plus or minus in the same way. In the region of 10-12 liters “per hundred” in the city – depending on the intensity of “traffic jams” on the roads. And about 7.5 l / 100 km on the highway – with the adaptive “cruise” turned on at speeds of 100-130 km / h.
Who prefers the ‘youthful’ look and handling of the crossover is generally not so important – if you will, Nissan X-Trail. And those who are ready to pass for a “sectarian-subarovod”, but at the same time appreciate the overall quality factor of the car, albeit with a discreet design – the choice is the Subaru Forester.
So what have we got. Two purebred Japanese medium crossovers. Yes, not with the latest, but quite modern hardware in the design. Both the Nissan X-Trail and Subaru Forester have four-wheel drive transmissions with a CVT and 2.5 liter naturally aspirated petrol. The power of the Nissan is 171 horsepower. Of. The Subarik has 185 horsepower under the hood. Of.
The slightly larger (approximately 70 kg) curb weight of the Forester partly compensates for its energy advantage of 14 hp. Of. Comparing the looks of two SUVs is generally meaningless. They have such different designs. Which of the two “crosses” is more stylish and beautiful – you can only judge based on your own (and biased!) sense of beauty.
Just look at the photos of these cars: all such a “sharply faceted” X-Trail front end and, unlike the more sedate and archaic (with the exception, perhaps, of block headlight shape), Forester “muzzle”. But Nissan’s “feed” (as far as I’m concerned) is a bit more banal than that of a Subaru competitor. But again, this is my opinion. I’m sure a bunch of people like to “hate” this point of view. And thank goodness: long live “taste” in aesthetics and bias in perception. Only their remains save us the opportunity to enjoy the variety of appearance of cars of different brands …
As for the interiors of Forester and X-Trail, with all the desire to maintain a tolerant attitude in the spirit of “everyone has the right to exist”, it will not be possible. Salon “Ixtrail” in comparison with the “Forester” looks pale. If it’s not cheap. And it’s not even about the finishing materials – let’s leave them outside the brackets. Just take a look at Nissan’s “needle” instrument panel and imagine Subaru’s color “instruments” display next to it.
What would you most like to look forward to, say, three to five years after purchasing a crossover, until it’s time to trade it in for a new car? Personally, I prefer a more modern monitor. Although this is not a “display board” from left to right roof rack, like the German and even the Chinese “premium”. Whatever the case may be, the Forester’s interior looks much more modern and solid.
There are two identical monitors on the center console. In Subaru, the top one is responsible for the climate and other “service”, and the bottom one for multimedia. Nissan only has one monitor. With an accentuated fresh design. No, there are more than useful options in X-Trail and Forester. Everything that should be in a modern car and even more. Cameras, electrical adjustments, drives … But at the same time, the interior of the X-Trail looks poorer, while the Subaru has something “in a mature way”.
And on the road, the cars make a very different impression. In the beginning, in a banal “overclocking” test, the X-Trail made a winning impression. Starts with a traffic light on it, albeit subjectively, is definitely more cheerful. Although the stated technical characteristics claim that it is not him, but the Forester that accelerates to 100 km / h a whole second faster – in 9.5 seconds versus 10.5 for the X-Trail. Apparently Nissan’s “brain” of the engine and CVT are set for a more dynamic start from a standstill. But then the work of the Subarik units is perceived much better than that of the X. Fact: The Forester CVT is tuned more finely.
The Subarovskaja transmission shifts minimally when accelerating and braking. No driving back and forth, neither in a traffic jam nor in a choppy driving mode. Almost perfect job. And Subaru’s suspension wins, too, albeit a little bit. The X-Trail also leans more into turns and behaves more sloppily on bumps. Forester, on the other hand, closes and gathers along the gullies…
Compared to the X-Trail, the Forester handlebars are also more “mature”, as it were, with sufficient feedback. In other words, the Subaru Forester feels more confident on the road than the Nissan X-Trail.
But both cars “guzzle” gasoline plus or minus in the same way. In the region of 10-12 liters “per hundred” in the city – depending on the intensity of “traffic jams” on the roads. And about 7.5 l / 100 km on the highway – with the adaptive “cruise” turned on at speeds of 100-130 km / h.
Who prefers the ‘youthful’ look and handling of the crossover is generally not so important – if you will, Nissan X-Trail. And those who are ready to pass for a “sectarian-subarovod”, but at the same time appreciate the overall quality factor of the car, albeit with a discreet design – the choice is the Subaru Forester.
Source: Avto Vzglyad
I’m Sandra Torres, a passionate journalist and content creator. My specialty lies in covering the latest gadgets, trends and tech news for Div Bracket. With over 5 years of experience as a professional writer, I have built up an impressive portfolio of published works that showcase my expertise in this field.
