Chevrolet Camaro 1998 vs Mitsubishi Galant 1996
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Body: | Cabrio | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Chevrolet Camaro is available only with rear wheel drive, while Mitsubishi Galant can be equipped with front wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive. | |||
| Engines: | 3.8 (petrol) | 1.8 - 3.0 (petrol, diesel) | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 193 HP | 90 - 280 HP | |
| Torque: | 305 NM | 178 - 363 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 - 8.8 seconds | 8.2 - 12.8 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.7 - 12.4 | 7.0 - 11.8 | |
|
Chevrolet Camaro petrol engines consumes on average 2.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than Mitsubishi Galant. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.91 m | 4.65 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.30 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Chevrolet Camaro is larger, but lower. Chevrolet Camaro is 26 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Galant, 14 cm wider, while the height of Chevrolet Camaro is 12 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 470 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1400 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Camaro is 0.8 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Galant, which means Chevrolet Camaro can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | ~ 1`851 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 3000 | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Camaro has
|
Mitsubishi Galant has
| |