X-trial reversing the van

[otherclive]

A couple of weeks ago my son and I went on a Land Rover Experience and were swept away with the capability of the auto Freelander 2. Both on road and off road it was superb, so much so that my son is now getting rid of his CRV and ordering an FL2. However my thoughts were directed to the new X-trail 173 bhp which whilst not so good off road or in floods as the FL2 seems to be an even better on road car and more economical. Then someone told me that the X trail had problems with a highish reverse gear which led to clutch burn if you were reversing the van up hill or on a rough sloping pitch. My current car is an auto Sorento which I must admit has been fault free since new (04) and does everything I want but if I change cars I would like another 10mpg or so solo. The X-trail auto is no good for me with its low towing weight.

Any X-trail owners comments would be welcome.

Other Clive

 

[GeorgeandAde]

Hi Other Clive.

Ive read a few comments on here about clutch burn when reversing on sloping ground.

If its a flat surface i reverse slowly and try to site caravan in one go.

If its on a slope...i always unhitch and use the motor mover.

Had a Mondeo previously and now have a 2.2 diesel crv.

Adrian

 

[otherclive]

Yes I agree with you, as my previous cars were all manual gearboxes. So ordinarily it would not concern me, but a friend specifically mentioned that he thought he had heard that the new X-trail is quite high geared in reverse and more susceptible than most to clutch burn. While I do have a mover, as you know sod's law often prevails!!

Cheers

Other Clive

 

[xtrailman]

First the xtrail is 171bhp, or 173hp(ps).

If reverse is high, then i honestly haven't noticed. But usually i use the reich mover, having read of a few fords burning out clutches i now use the mover every time, regardless of the odd looks i sometimes get.

Clive the FL2 has won every test i have read, so it is obviously a good car to drive, but i am as yet not convinced that the car is reliable. A car prone to break downs never gets to my must test drive list.

The review on the crv auto gave the honda only 3 stars, so maybe that would be a poor choice again?

I am very happy with the xtrail, solo the computer gets to 43mpg, having just been away for two weeks mainly towing the mileage is showing 37mpg. I have never checked the computers accuracy, but another forum owner found the readings 2 mpg high.

As the new sorento is lighter and more economical, with a engine that has excellent reviews, along with 5 years warranty, why not buy another?

 

[xtrailman]

sorry i always get the sorento and santa fe mixed up.

in the lastest pc test the sorento got 3 stars, the santa 4 stars, and got the best value award.

 

[otherclive]

Thanks, I believe that the new FL2 is much more reliable than the older model, which suffered badly in its early years. However so did the previous X-trail which had turbo problems and cam chain guide issues. I have considered the new Sorento but it is too big, my experience of the dealers has been poor so locking into a 7 year warranty might not be that big a deal. My elderly Sorento is nearly 7 years and has'nt cost a penny in repairs. But when that model first came out Kia US gave a 10 year 100k mile warranty, so perhaps Kia are only now moving partly into alignment with their US market after some 7-8 years.

But thank you for your experience of the X-trail, I like them as they still retain a good off road capabilty, and they are roomy and good on-road. My wife loves her 70mpg Note too, so there is pressure from that side.

Other Clive

 

[xtrailman]

clive

On the cl i have just returned from was another 171 owner, i don't see too many of the new types for some reason. He couldn't prasie his xtrail enough, having previously towed with jags and bmw etc.

While i think his praise was a bit over the top, i did move myself from a Audi A4 quattro avant with 180bhp, and that was to the first version of the xtrail a 2004 model, still owned by my son, still on the original turbo, brakes etc, only the intercooler was changed due to the common oil leak on the version 1. And the boost sensor was changed under recall to prevent turbo over boost, but yes many turbos are reported to have failed.

That is a nissan engine the 2.2, the latest 2 litre engines are Renault, so far no reports of any common faults.

 

[otherclive]

Ray,

looking at the Honest John website the new 2.0 X-trail engine is similar to the 2.5 in the Pathfinder and that one did not experience the issues that affected some of the 2.2s. Although despite that the 2.2 features well in the Waranty Direct Reliabilty index, almost as good as the Sorento!!

Cheers

Other Clive

 

[ChrisUK]

Ray,

looking at the Honest John website the new 2.0 X-trail engine is similar to the 2.5 in the Pathfinder and that one did not experience the issues that affected some of the 2.2s. Although despite that the 2.2 features well in the Waranty Direct Reliabilty index, almost as good as the Sorento!!

Cheers

Other Clive

We have been towing with a 173ps , 08, Xtrail for a year now, and the reverse gear does seem high, I think this applies to a lot of cars. I always use the motor mover for this reason. The only problem with this is that it takes a little longer and importantly I'm forgetting my reversing skills.

I find the computer mpg a little high, we do about 38 solo, and 26 towing (typically at 56mpg up to Scotland).

The underneith is not protected much for off roading, so I would not go down much more than the odd farm track. It was great even on standard tyres in the snow though.

The only problem I have had was last year with the DPF (diesel particulate filter) which can be a problem with all newish diesels. Since then I have learnt to use more revs and try to avoid too many short journies where the engine does not get upto temp. No other problems at 22k miles.

Generally we are delighted with it, it feels more like an estate car with a tall roof and part time 4x4 than an off roader.

The 173ps certainly makes it very lively solo.

Mine has the sat nav which is good, but it turns into a reversing camera which is very good, especially when looking for the caravan hitch. This is one of those stupid gimmicks that I don't think I could do without now.

 

[ChrisUK]

Sorry, I meant this as a reply, not a comment.

We have been towing with a 173ps , 08, Xtrail for a year now, and the reverse gear does seem high, I think this applies to a lot of cars. I always use the motor mover for this reason. The only problem with this is that it takes a little longer and importantly I'm forgetting my reversing skills.

I find the computer mpg a little high, we do about 38 solo, and 26 towing (typically at 56mpg up to Scotland).

The underneith is not protected much for off roading, so I would not go down much more than the odd farm track. It was great even on standard tyres in the snow though.

The only problem I have had was last year with the DPF (diesel particulate filter) which can be a problem with all newish diesels. Since then I have learnt to use more revs and try to avoid too many short journies where the engine does not get upto temp. No other problems at 22k miles.

Generally we are delighted with it, it feels more like an estate car with a tall roof and part time 4x4 than an off roader.

The 173ps certainly makes it very lively solo.

Mine has the sat nav which is good, but it turns into a reversing camera which is very good, especially when looking for the caravan hitch. This is one of those stupid gimmicks that I don't think I could do without now.

p.s. the 150 / 173, 2.0l engines are renault / nissan engines and I don't think they are used in any other nissan.

 

[BryanS]

Largely agree with ChrisUK.
Our late 97 X-Trail 171 (or 173) has done 34k miles including several caravan holidays. All OK so far, and Which's recent car survey rates the model a Best Buy with good reliability (better than the current Honda CRV even). Don't be put off by the Renault engine - it's made for French drivers after all...
Stability towing a 1450kg caravan is excellent - none of this passing-coach-suck that some people experience. Reversing with a van does need clutch slip but for a few yards it's no problem - I suppose other cars are similar.
And it's very relaxing to drive long distances. Just wish we'd ordered the optional reversing camera!

Bry

 

[JohnGriffiths]

In common with some here I rarely use my 09 173 X-trail for reversing (some say because I'm crap at it) and prefer the mover. But looking at the specs the ratios for reverse and 1st appear very similar and I've never had any issues pulling forward up slopes.
Are people experiencing some brake binding perhaps?

 

[ChrisUK]

You are right of course, 3.727 = 1st, 3.641 = rev. only slightly higher. But, when you set off forwards you let the clutch engage fully as soon as possible and accelerate away. But in reverse you may have to slip the clutch for several minutes whilst you manoeuvre. Conventional autos are probably the best answer but the XTrail one is not up to it. I believe this is also a problem for the Honda auto.