Mitsubishi ASX 2012 vs Ford EcoSport 2013
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 117 HP | 112 HP | |
| Torque: | 154 NM | 140 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.4 seconds | 14.1 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi ASX is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi ASX engine produces 5 HP more power than Ford EcoSport, whereas torque is 14 NM more than Ford EcoSport. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi ASX reaches 100 km/h speed 2.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 6.3 | |
|
The Mitsubishi ASX is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mitsubishi ASX consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford EcoSport, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi ASX over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 52 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1080 km in combined cycle | 820 km in combined cycle | |
| 1280 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| Mitsubishi ASX gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 190 mm (7.5 inches) | 180 mm (7.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mitsubishi ASX can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Mitsubishi ASX version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. Choose from seven 4x4 versions of Mitsubishi ASX 2012 if off-road driveability is important to you. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Ford EcoSport engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 4 years | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi ASX might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.30 m | 4.27 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.62 m | 1.65 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mitsubishi ASX is 2 cm longer than the Ford EcoSport, width is practically the same , while the height of Mitsubishi ASX is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 442 litres | 333 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1219 litres | 1238 litres | |
| Mitsubishi ASX has 109 litres more trunk space than the Ford EcoSport. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford EcoSport (by 19 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`870 | 1`735 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Mitsubishi ASX has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford EcoSport has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Mitsubishi ASX, so Mitsubishi ASX quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 400 | 10 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi ASX has
|
Ford EcoSport has
| |