comparisons and car reviews
Car manufacturers have long recognized that compact crossovers are the future. Since it is the cars of this class that combine comfort and handling, which are not much inferior to those of simple sedans, a spacious interior, a large trunk for transporting a wide variety of goods and increased cross-country ability. Everything is in order with many crossovers and with fuel consumption... Due to the verified aerodynamics and relatively small mass, their appetite is at a very acceptable level. There is, perhaps, only one drawback - it is very difficult to choose a suitable car from several dozen options.
Before purchasing, you have to perform a good dozen test drives, call countless dealers and spend days studying car publications, Internet sites, company brochures, charts and tables. Otherwise, nothing. And at the end of all this, it is usually not possible to stop at any particular car. Who, for example, to choose from a pair of Nissan X-Trail and Mazda CX-5? The price tag for both cars is practically the same, the level of equipment is also.
A very careful comparison is indispensable.
- 1 exterior and interior
- 2 Specifications Mazda CX-5 and Nissan X-Trail
- 2.0.1 Video: Nissan X-Trail - test drive
- 2.0.2 Video: Mazda CX-5 2015 - test drive
exterior and interior
In favor of the Nissan X-Trail is the fact that the Japanese crossover appeared on the market recently. It happened in 2014. It would seem that the X-Trail should not become familiar yet, but here its design played a cruel joke with the car. If the X-Trail of the last generation did not completely resemble other models of the Japanese company in its appearance, then the car being produced now is a real Nissan with all the branded elements in its appearance. Wash, there is nothing wrong with that, but the trouble is that from a hundred meters the X-Trail cannot be distinguished from the more compact and, accordingly, slightly cheaper crossover Nissan Qashqai. For owners of Qashqai, such a similarity is only on hand, but those who purchase an X-Trail for themselves will definitely want their car to be endowed with at least a modicum of individuality.
But, if we ignore the comparison, we will have to admit that the Nissan X-Trail looks cool. Designers made an offer to potential clients, albeit not very flashy, but very solid look. Nissan X-Trail inspires respect.
The Mazda CX-5 crossover started three years earlier than its own counterpart. But the exterior of the car turned out to be so successful that, in addition, during the restyling that the Mazda company carried out this year, they decided not to change it. The designers limited themselves to only small touches, thanks to which motorists will be able to distinguish the updated car from pre-styling assumptions. Instead of a radiator grill in a small cell, the crossover has acquired a "shield" with large slats.
The front bumper has also changed little. But in general, the Mazda CX-5 crossover remained itself. This is the same as before a stylish car, pleasing with its swift lines, predatory optics and verified proportions.
Years go by, and Mazda CX-5, there is such a feeling, only prettier.
Yes, and it is not completely felt that the Mazda CX-5 crossover noticed the light back in 2011, far by automotive standards. A stylish three-spoke wheel would fully fit a "charged" Mazda 3 MPS, and better than a good combination of devices in three ringed "wells" they won't come up with anything for a long time. The huge color display, which seems to be implanted into the front panel, also fits perfectly into the interior.
In the very suit there is also a minimalistic air conditioning control unit. In a word - the interior of the Mazda CX-5 is specifically perceived as ultra-modern and very relevant.
The interior of the Mazda CX-5
In the Nissan X-Trail, the second mood. Self-control and more self-control - it seems that the designers who worked on the X-Trail interior were guided by this motto. The steering wheel with the same three spokes as on the Mazda CX-5, here completely does not seem to be sporty. And the architecture of the center console itself is an example of automotive classicism. The color display is surrounded on both sides by keys, above it are small deflectors of the ventilation system, below it are buttons and "lambs" responsible for the climate control settings. Everything is extremely easy and clear.
And quite expensive. Thanks to the high-quality, excellent assembly and finishing materials in the Nissan X-Trail, you get the feeling that you are in a much more expensive car.
Salon Nissan X-Trail
This feeling does not leave the rear seats either. And this is fully natural. The Nissan X-Trail is about ten centimeters longer than the Mazda CX-5, and therefore offers more space for passengers. If a tall passenger behind a tall driver in the Mazda CX-5 will sit without a gap in the knee area, then in the X-Trail in the same situation there will still be a significant margin of free space.
The crossover from Nissan also wins in terms of the amount of trunk - 497 liters versus 403 liters for the Mazda CX-5. Despite the fact that with the backs of the rear seats folded down, and this is also thought to be unusual, the difference is no longer so huge. In the Mazda CX-5, the amount of trunk will be 1560 liters, and in the second Japanese crossover, the load will be given only 25 liters more.
Huge and roomy trunk Nissan X-Trail
Features Mazda CX-5 and Nissan X-Trail
When determining the line of power units for cars sold on the domestic market, both Japanese companies were unanimous in their uniqueness. As if by agreement, they offer two gasoline and one diesel engine for their own crossovers. With the Nissan X-Trail, gasoline engines have a quantity of 2 liters (144 horsepower) and 2.5 liters (171 horsepower), and a diesel "Nissan" unit with 1.6 liters produces 130 "horses".
With the gearboxes offered for the X-Trail, the situation is as follows - for diesel crossovers, only "mechanics" are offered, the 177-horsepower version is equipped only with a variator, and for cars with a basic two-liter engine, both types of transmissions are cheap.
Mazda chose other combinations. The variator on the Mazda CX-5 crossover is not installed in principle. Instead, the Japanese use the familiar automatic gearbox. It works in tandem with any of the three engines offered for the CX-5. They are as follows - a two-liter gasoline with a capacity of 150 Horse power, 192-horsepower petrol in the amount of 2.5 liters and diesel power unit, which, with an amount of 2.2 liters, develops 175 "horses". For the most not strong gasoline engine, a manual gearbox is also cheap.
It is she who is installed by default on the basic version of the Japanese crossover. As well as front-wheel drive, which is this car looks out of place. Fortunately, for a small surcharge, the client will still take, albeit a connected one, but four-wheel drive... The situation is the same with the Nissan X-Trail.
If you want to feel confident in the winter period - please be so kind as to fork out just a little.
Video: Nissan X-Trail - test drive
The top-end gasoline and diesel engines installed on the Nissan X-Trail are noticeably not strong "Mazda" power units. Accordingly, there can be no question of any correct comparison in this case. In equal conditions, the Mazda CX-5 will be noticeably more dynamic than its own rival. Despite the fact that with similar in power two-liter engines (the difference in 6 horsepower can hardly be considered decisive), the Mazda CX-5 will still be in the forefront.
If a crossover from Nissan with a CVT takes 12.1 seconds to accelerate to a lot, then the Mazda CX-5 with an “automatic” will easily collect the coveted hundred in just 9.8 seconds. And it will not be possible to catch up. High speed the Mazda CX-5 is also higher - 191 km / h versus 180 km / h for the Nissan X-Trail.
Here it is definitely not in the six missing "horses" the point, but in aerodynamics.
Video: Mazda CX-5 2015 - test drive
But the fact that the two-liter Nissan X-Trail is noticeably more voracious than the Mazda CX-5 with the same engine in terms of quantity can be fully explained by different weights of cars. The difference in two hundred kilograms makes itself felt. Just based on this, the relatively heavy Nissan X-Trail in the city will require 9.4 l / 100 km, and the more compact and lighter Mazda CX-5 will cost 8.2 liters of fuel for every hundred kilometers.
The price tag for both Japanese crossovers may be monotonous, but in reality they are completely different cars. Playful and stylish, the Mazda CX-5 is perfect for the young and active. But the Nissan X-Trail was originally focused on people at home.
They can easily come to terms with the fact that they will not succeed in traffic light races, but with all their hearts they will love X-Trail for its respectable appearance, spacious interior, reliability and comfort.
All three cars are similar in size, but significantly differ in character and technically. Nissan coupled with a 2.5-liter aspirated engine (171 hp / 233 N ∙ m) attached a variator. Mazda has attached a classic 6-speed automatic to the engine of the same configuration, but more powerful (192 hp / 256 N ∙ m). And Hyundai is generally at the forefront of technical solutions: a 1.6 turbo engine (177 hp / 265 Nm) is combined with a 7-speed robot with two clutches. Let's see which bundle will show itself best. But first, let's get a job in the driver's seat.
Interiors: a leader is outlined
The most morally old salon inX-Trail: the finish here is a mediocre imitation of carbon fiber, a mobile phone hangs out in any of the available niches, and the multimedia system has mediocre graphics and does not play all formats (for example, it ignores MPEG-4 audio). At Hyundai, the graphics of the central display are more modern, but not all files are readable either, and the sound of the speakers, unlike Nissan, was frankly disappointing. Mazda has a decent interface with a convenient twist-button control unit on the tunnel, atypical for this class, and the sound and omnivorousness of the system are in perfect order.
Materials inCX-5 is also the best: the plastic is all soft, a lot of high-quality leather, but what looks like metal is metal. In addition, in it, in the only one there is an automatic mode of all four glasses - as in the "Europeans"! The order and the organization of storage of small things. Tucson is finished somewhat simpler, but in terms of convenience it is also well thought out: there is a cool niche for a large smartphone, all the necessary cupholders are made more convenient than in the X-Trail. The X-Trail is in the lead in terms of space inside, Tucson is almost on par with it, and Mazda lags behind Nissan mainly due to a significant difference for the rear passenger's legs - minus 5 cm for a driver with a height of 178 cm when landing "by himself."
On the tarmac: leadership is strengthened
Let's start with the freeway, where all three crossovers show sufficient dynamics... Nissan's acceleration is confident, but moderate: the variator is able to imitate gears and willingly drives the tachometer needle into the red zone. Hyundai has a feeling of robot laziness, which can be defeated either by kick-down or by activating sports mode. But all the same, the box is not an example of a rate of fire, and the peak output of the motor is comparable to that of competitors. The more powerful Mazda also has a sports algorithm, but it drives briskly even without it. And when the word Sport lights up on the tidy, it is as if the lack of boost in the engine wakes up.
In the same place, on the Novorizhskaya motorway and adjacent rural lanes, we can clearly see the difference in handling. The CX-5 sits on a straight line like an icebreaker, and the Tucson's helm has a slightly blurred zero and therefore requires steering. And the Nissan X-Trail has an itch on the steering wheel that rivals don't. In terms of noise insulation, Mazda is the best (balanced acoustic background), then Hyundai (arches dominate) and the weaker of all - X-Trail, which has a good noise of tires (by the way, more off-road) and the air licking the body sounds more obtrusive.
The most reckless taxiing is again at Mazda, which is given high-speed driving no worse than many cars. Hyundai's chassis is also responsive, but reactions are slower and more roll. Nissan is perceived to be the most "bus", but its habits are also within the limits of reliable and correct - it is simple, to light up on the X-Trail, unlike the CX-5, will not work. Typical for flat roads, seams, joints and shallow potholes handle the dense Tucson (slightly better) and CX-5 (slightly worse) suspensions better, but the X-Trail feels a little oak under these conditions. But as soon as we leave the pavement the balance of power is radically changing.
Off Road: Change Favorite
The wide undercoat of the semi-abandoned quarries is all made up of shallow, shallow potholes - the perfect shaker for checking the shock absorbers! First I try Mazda: the roar from the arches is such that a completely new car becomes a pity. Shakes hard and there is no chance to maintain the pace of colleagues at Hyundai andNissan... Tucson behaves in a similar way, but the shock absorbers resist the bottom hammering more humbly and quietly, and the body does not jump, as if on ring crowbars.
The king of the broken road is the X-Trail. You can ride it more comfortably and faster: the suspension “struts” work in a wider range of displacements and give out sonorous breakdown less often. The greatest vertical wheel travel helps the Nissan crossover also off-road: where electronic imitations of interwheel locks are already cracking at the "hanging" competitors, Nissan still clings to the surface of the tire. And when all-wheel drive is required from the off-road transmission, Mazda and Hyundai demonstrate approximately the same asphalt behavior: a lot of axle box, little use.
In addition to this, it is difficult for Hyundai to achieve smoothness of movements on gullies: after all, the clutches of the robot seize more sharply than the torque converter, and the engine thrust of the 1.6 engine at the bottom is less than that of the 2.5. This also spoils the character of Hyundai in traffic jams: in terms of work, the "box" is similar to the well-known DSG, except that Hyundai is in no hurry to get under way without gas, itself. Nissan with a smooth variator and in the city a little more pleasant, and off-road a cut above both rivals: everything is smooth, clear, reliable. The electronics of the clutch and lock simulator work efficiently, and the geometry of the body allows for a little more.
Fuel consumption: what a surprise!
If a combination of robot + low-volume turbo engine brings Tucson both on and off the pavement, then what is it for? The answer is obvious: fuel economy. And here a surprise awaited us. Hyundai with all its advanced units, according to our measurements, showed an economy of 11.6 liters per 100 km (according to the onboard computer - 11.5). At the same level - 11.8 (11.3) - the Nissan X-Trail came out with not the most modern aspirated 2.5 and a CVT. And the surprise wasMazda CX-5 with a 6-speed automatic: its not rolled (200 km on the odometer) 2.5 consumed only 9.9 liters per hundred at 10.7 on the onboard computer. It seems that sky-active technologies are working.
Who is the best?
Two "Japanese" are located on opposite poles, and the "Korean" is somewhere in the middle: not as cramped, sporty and premium as Mazda, and not as spacious, utilitarian and off-road as Nissan. Let's take a look at the prices. Nissan is in the range of 1,749,000 - 2,019,000, Mazda - 1,750,000 - 2,091,600, and Hyundai - 1,605,900 - 2,002,900. At the same time, the top-end CX-5 is better equipped than the X-Trail (the difference in price justified), but the sophisticated Tucson at a lower price is not inferior to the CX-5 in equipment, especially since the latter is devoid of a banal electric trunk drive and a couple of other little things. At the same time, Hyundai also has seat ventilation.
In medium trim levels (Mazda and Nissan for 1.865 million and Hyundai for 1.808), there are no obvious distortions - parity, but taking into account the price. Therefore, it turns out that Tucson is the most affordable and has average consumer properties. Mazda is clearly the best for metropolitan areas and good roads, while Nissan is better suited for the provinces and bad ones. That's why the final choice is still yours- here who is more important.
P.S. How and why exactly these models met in the final you can read the links: Mitsubishi Outlander versus Nissan X-Trail, Hyundai Tucson versus Toyota RAV4 and Subaru Forester versus Mazda CX-5.
Dmitry | 23 September 2015, 22:05 |Comparative evaluation of Japanese crossovers
Comparisons are never easy. And comparing cars is even more difficult, because there is no way to get away from the share of subjectivity, and among cars there is always a “favorite” who just wants to overestimate a point higher than competitors.
Compare 4 Japanese crossovers:,. Acquaintance with the cars took place during test drives.
In order to somehow equalize the chances, we will determine the criteria by which we will compare cars: exterior / interior, acceleration dynamics, economy / fuel consumption, ride comfort and comfort, cost and ease of maintenance, stealability / non-theft, liquidity (the ability to sell a car at an adequate price), safety, reliability, car value.
Grades for all criteria are given on a 10-point scale.
Exterior / interior.
Of the four Japanese crossovers, I liked the design of the Mitsubishi Outlander III, but did not like the presence of a large number of chrome parts in it, and the glossy front bumper pad is impractical for operation in Russian conditions. Score - 9 points.
The new design of the Nissan X-Trail was generally liked, but the stern with "scanty" taillights was not impressive. Score - 8 points.
Mazda CX-5 is a fairly harmonious car, after restyling it began to look better, but in some details it still lacks some kind of completeness, in particular the shape of the wheel arches. Score - 7 points.
Toyota RAV4 - subjectively, I didn't like the car in terms of design. Score - 5 points.
Acceleration dynamics.
In my opinion, Mazda CX-5 accelerates best of all. And the engine is the most powerful and the torque is the greatest. Score - 10 points.
Outlander just drives, no special fire is felt in acceleration. Score - 8 points.
I think the 2.5 X-Trail will ride in much the same way as the Outlander, alas, the test was a car with a 2-liter engine. Score - 7 points.
I didn't like Toyota RAV4 for overclocking. The dynamics is the worst, you press the pedal to the floor, but the engine only growls, does not go. Score - 6 points.
Economy / Fuel consumption.
During standard test drives, it is difficult to determine how much fuel a vehicle will consume during normal driving. Therefore, we will focus on the characteristics of the manufacturer and the readings of the car's on-board computer.
The most economical one promises to be Mazda CX-5, the consumption declared by the manufacturer is very impressive - 7.3 liters per 100 km. Score - 9 points.
Toyota RAV4 showed good consumption, just over 8.5 liters per hundred. But in fairness, it should be noted that the test ride took place on the highway and at a speed of 90 km / h. Score - 8 points.
Nissan X-Trail showed 11 liters per hundred during the test in city mode. Score - 7 points.
Mitsubishi Outlander showed a consumption of 13 liters during the test. Score - 6 points.
Smoothness and comfort.
I liked the ride and suspension performance of the Mitsubishi Outlander III. Looked at a few test drives of this car, which said the Outlander got tougher. It seemed to me that the car has become more comfortable compared to its predecessors. Most importantly, noise insulation has improved. Score - 10 points.
About the same picture with the Nissan X-Trail, journalists say - it has become tougher, obviously I did not notice it. Noise isolation is worse than in the Mitsubishi Outlander III. Score - 9 points.
Mazda CX-5 is harsh and bounces on large irregularities in the feed. Noise isolation is worse than Nissan and Mitsubishi. Score - 8 points.
Toyota RAV4 - a tough car, frankly "goats" on bumps. Noise isolation is not very good. Score - 6 points.
Maintenance is simplicity and low cost of maintenance.
Due to the change in the ruble / dollar / euro exchange rate, the prices for maintenance of Japanese crossovers have also changed. It's not cheap at the moment. The prices for spare parts from official dealers were already high, and now they have become even higher. You can reduce costs by looking for and purchasing spare parts yourself.
All crossovers are guaranteed for 3 years or 100,000 km. But, the service interval for Mazda, Nissan, Mitsubishi is 15,000 km or once a year (whichever comes first), while for Toyota it is 10,000 km or once a year (whichever comes earlier).
Thus, if MOT is carried out according to the mileage, then Toyota's service will be more expensive. Mazda CX-5, Nissan X-Trail, Mitsubishi Outlander get 7 points, Toyota 6 points.
Security.
I watched several videos of Japanese crossover crash tests. All have a good safety record. Everyone gets 9 points.
Hijackability / non-hijackability.
The most hijacked in the four Japanese crossovers are the Toyota RAV4 and Mitsubishi Outlander. Score - 5 points. Mazda CX-5 is also on the list of stolen cars, but not in the first places. Score - 6 points. There is no information about the stealability of Nissan X-Trail. Score - 8 points.
Liquidity / ability to sell a car at an adequate price.
In our country, they love Toyota, so selling the RAV4 on the secondary market will not be a problem, and selling it for adequate money. Score - 10 points.
I think it will not be so easy to sell all the other models. Therefore, I rate this as: Mitsubishi Outlander III - 8 points, Mazda CX-5 - 7 points, Nissan X-Trail - 6 points.
Vehicle reliability.
The compared crossovers are Japanese-made, and Japanese cars have always been famous for their good reliability. But it is known that making cars reliable in our time is not profitable for automakers. It is enough for the car to pass the warranty period without problems. Therefore, I will place the points as follows: Toyota RAV4 - 9 points, Mitsubishi Outlander, Mazda CX-5, Nissan X-Trail - 8 points.
In 2013, Nissan surprised everyone with a new generation of the Nissan X-Trail - T35. For some, the surprise became pleasant, for others - on the contrary, but no one remained indifferent. Everything is learned in comparison - so we will compare the new Nissan with the Mazda CX 5, which has become a recognized benchmark. So, Mazda CX 5 vs NissanX-Trail - and may the best man win!
Engine and chassis
The latest generation of the popular Nissan X-Trail crossover saw the light of day only recently - in 2013. The designers of Nissan did not even hide the fact that they were working with an eye on the 2016 Mazda CX 5, as the main competitor. This is evidenced by the similarity of many characteristics. For example, the displacement of gasoline engines. Only now, the masters from Nissan failed to achieve similar power. However, judge for yourself:
Sorry for the banality, but the result is obvious.
Reference! Engine power directly affects the maximum speed, which for Nissan is 180 km / h (for Mazda - 20 km / h more).Mazda also confidently leads in dynamics - the symbolic milestone of 100 km / h from a standstill CX 5 crosses in 8.9 seconds, while the Nissan X-trail - in more than 11.
It is especially offensive for the Nissan diesel, which was clearly designed according to the residual principle - "so that it was." In addition to a very weak diesel, there is a manual transmission - no options.
But the "petrol" versions of the Nissan X-Trail, which clearly enjoy the greater love of designers, are equipped with an automatic transmission or a variator. A luxury inaccessible to Mazda fans, on which the variator is not put at the bottom that and never, guided by an unknown principle.
If we talk about the wheel arrangement of the Mazda cx 5 or the Nissan X trail, then it does not differ - 2x4 with a leading front wheelset for both cars. However, a plug-in rear drive axle is available as an option for Nissan buyers.
Important! Drivers note the better handling of the Mazda cx 5: following the sporty style, the designers reduced the steering play to a minimum, the car's response to the driver's actions is almost instantaneous.At the same time, the Nissan X trail responds with a noticeable delay.
Exterior
The latest generation of the X-Trail T32 series is available on the new modular CMF platform. It is she who is the basis for another crossover from Nissan - the legendary Qashqai. Is it any surprise that in the end the new X-trail is much more like Qashqai than its own predecessors in the series?
Considering that the new X-Trail surpasses the Qashqai in all respects, resembling it externally, it seems that Nissan's designers wanted to make it like Qashqai, only better. It is commendable of course, but it is not clear why they began to implement this goal on the basis of the X-trail. Of course, the rectangular, rough, with a front end similar to a wild boar, the X-Trail-T31 was not handsome, but had its own circle of fans of the brutal style a la SUV. And the fans obviously didn't like the new look.
The new Nissan has become more Europeanized, trying to be more a city car than an SUV (the lost four-wheel drive also speaks of this), but it has lost its rough identity. Whether Nissan X-Trail can become one of its own among Porsche and BMW is a rhetorical question.
And here we cannot fail to note the advantage of the Mazda CX 5 with its loyalty to the once-chosen KODO concept - “soul in motion”, embodied in every detail of the forward-directed silhouette, embodying speed and dedication with its graceful contours.
Summing up the exterior review: for those who want to buy a definitely stylish and elegant car a la Europe, but cheaper, the Nissan X-TrailT-32 is an excellent choice. For lovers of oriental originality and loyalty to a single style, the Mazda CX 5 is more suitable.
Interior
The functionality of the equipment of the driver's seat of Mazda and Nissan is practically the same, the differences concern (again) style. If the interior of the Mazda CX 5 rests on its progressiveness and modernity, the general impression is something between an airplane and a sports car, then the main mood of the "insides" of Nissan X-Trail is classicism.
Example! The main detail of the front panel of the Mazda CX 5 is the multimedia screen, although recessed into the torpedo, but occupying a central place, displayed as a testament to technocraticism. A similar screen in the Nissan cockpit "slid" down, practically merging with the radio and making room for the deflectors of the climate control ventilation system.At first glance, everything is the same, but a completely different feeling - a great example of a different approach to design.
The differences were also touched upon in the dashboard - in Nissan it is much less "sporty" than in Mazda. The speedometer and tachometer dominate, and the engine parameters indicator, which is one of the leading elements in Mazda, is much more modest in Nissan. The classic scheme - in truth, the classic in everything!
It should be noted that the Nissan X-Trail is only pretending to be less progressive. Reviews indicate that many users give preference to the interior equipment of Nissan, considering it more perfect. They note the upper sunroof, electric seat drives with position memory, increased comfort, especially in the rear seats, which stands out even against the background of the Mazda CX 5, which is very advanced in this regard.
Many people like the rear view camera - an irreplaceable assistant when parking. The camera lens is equipped with a washer.
The prices for both cars are about the same - 1400-1500 thousand rubles. Diesel Nissan X-Trail with manual gearbox can be purchased for 100-200 thousand cheaper. Cost is clearly not going to be the deciding factor when choosing a Nissan x trail or a Mazda cx-5.
Summing up, we note: Nissan X-Trail is an excellent car, although it is inferior to Mazda in speed and power, more than compensates for the lag with the comfort of the interior. Mazda CX 5 is the choice of those who want a fast and stylish car.
Each of them has at least 170 hp under the hood, automatic and four-wheel drive transmissions, and a "Made in Russia" sign on the body. Vladivostok Mazda CX-5, St. Petersburg Nissan X-Trail and Toyota RAV4 - all with aspirated 2.5. And the Volkswagen Tiguan 2.0 TSI of the Kaluga assembly is already a new, second generation. Who is better suited to our realities?
Z ima! A peasant, triumphant ... Well, in our case, let it be a city dweller who renews the path on a crossover. Is he freezing? First of all, we measured the efficiency of the heaters, and it is not bad for the whole four. But only Toyota and Volkswagen can boast of a warm steering wheel and rear seats, albeit for a surcharge. The ability to easily flutter into the salon without getting your hands dirty first, and then your clothes? The front part of the X-Trail thresholds, unlike others, does not cover with doors. And by the way, Nissan and Volkswagen will let you beat the brushes that freeze in the snow only in the service, vertical, position of the leashes when the engine is turned off. So, Toyota is among the leaders in terms of winter practicality.
The RAV4, with its well-adjusted seating geometry in tight seats, is also good in terms of ergonomics. But the Tiguan is still preferable. It doesn't even have the slightest flaws that the RAV4 has in abundance. In Volkswagen, the buttons are not scattered around the cabin like salt on the sidewalk, but are grouped by function. There is no need, as in Toyota, to look under the canopy of the front panel in search of the desired key, and the climate control display does not glare. You can only blame Volkswagen for the inability to operate an expensive multimedia system with gloves.
Adaptive cruise control is an option. But all Tiguanas have a radar by default: the Front Assist autobraking system is already "in the base"
Traction control system is disengaged in one motion
For the left foot in Tiguan, the most convenient parkplatz
Even two-liter bottles can be put in door pockets
The electrified seat can remember the settings of three drivers
If Toyota has succeeded in soft look plastics, Volkswagen is a pioneer in hard look materials that are hard in appearance but soft to the touch.
At the request of Apple, there should be only one USB port, and Volkswagen does not want to add connectors for recharging gadgets, so that people do not get confused in the abundance of USB ports.
The glove box is unlocked, and also the smallest, but inside it is trimmed with velvet and the multimedia module has two slots for SD cards
Self-parking is only offered by Nissan and Volkswagen
Neatness in everything: even the cup holders are closed with a curtain. It's a shame they are heavily relegated back
Despite the abundance of corners, the decoration of Tiguan can hardly be attributed to the creations of the Cubist artists. Rather, it is Saxon traditionalism in a modern reading.
In Mazda and Nissan, the chairs are more relaxed, which will appeal to people in the body, but slender ones are unlikely to appreciate it. But the CX-5 and X-Trail, unlike the RAV4, are at least as good as the Tiguan in the sense of quality: an abundance of pliable plastic, precise fit of panels, even stitches on the upholstery.
Buyers of the Highline version (this is the only equipment for two-liter Tiguanas so far) will not be able to refuse virtual devices similar to those used in the Passat
And why are all four saving on passengers? The upholstery of the rear doors, in contrast to the front ones, has no softness. Practicality is also less: door pockets are more modest, folding tables are only in Tiguan. Three-zone climate control can only be provided by Volkswagen, and Mazda and Toyota do not even have vents in the center!
Four modes (winter, road, off-road, individual) are more of a whim than a necessity. So, for example, in an off-road vehicle, for some reason, the traction control system is turned off, and with it the imitation of interwheel locks. As a result, it crawls better along the gullies when the switch is in the position for asphalt ">
The new Tiguan now has not a hydromechanical "automatic", but the most reliable of the preselections - a seven-speed "robot" DQ500 with wet clutches
Four modes (winter, road, off-road, individual) are more of a whim than a necessity. So, for example, in an off-road vehicle, for some reason, the traction control system is turned off, and with it the imitation of interwheel locks. As a result, the Tiguan crawls better on gullies when the switch is in the asphalt position.
But if the CX-5 turned out to be the closest in this quartet, then the RAV4 is the most spacious. In Nissan, when three of us land, the tall ones come into contact with the roof slope: the giant Rastegaev last year. And in Volkswagen, the massive central tunnel and the molding of the rear sofa interfere: the outermost riders move onto the one in the center. In Toyota, there are no problems. And only in it you can lean back in order to sleep: the largest range of adjustment of the backrest tilt.
Three-zone climate control in the two-liter Tiguan "in the base"! And here is the heated rear sofa option ">
To be a benchmark, a luxurious Tiguan chair would be good to acquire adjustable lateral support, so that overweight ones do not complain of being cramped, and thin ones - of excessive freedom.
Three-zone climate control and heated back sofa
0 / 0
Of course, Volkswagen has a double floor, and Nissan has a partition, with which the trunk can be made two-story. And both have a longitudinal adjustment of the rear sofa, which allows you to increase the volume for luggage to the level of Toyota and Mazda. But the riders will surely remember how you infringed on their freedom while traveling in order to please luggage.
Volkswagen is traditionally attentive to luggage details: a hook for bags, a button for folding the back sofa, an outlet and even a flashlight.
In the meantime, there are no passengers, you can drive. It's not for nothing that we took the most powerful versions, right?
Trick # 1 for the traffic light champion is to put the powertrain in Sport mode and start on two pedals. But this allows you to win only 0.1-0.2 seconds in the time of dialing "hundreds". More important than life hack # 2 is disabling ESP. Slight slip allows the engine to rev up, and the electronics do not stifle its rush.
