Mitsubishi ASX 2012 vs Toyota RAV4 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 300 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 10 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi ASX and Toyota RAV4 have the same engine power, but Mitsubishi ASX torque is 40 NM less than Toyota RAV4. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.7 | 6.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi ASX is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi ASX consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota RAV4, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi ASX over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi ASX consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota RAV4. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1050 km in combined cycle | 1000 km in combined cycle | |
| 1220 km on highway | 1150 km on highway | ||
| 900 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| Ground clearance: | 170 mm (6.7 inches) | 182 mm (7.2 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Toyota RAV4 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 Toyota RAV4 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. Choose from six 4x4 versions of Toyota RAV4 2010 if off-road driveability is important to you. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Corolla Verso, Toyota Verso | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota RAV4 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Toyota RAV4 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.30 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.63 m | 1.72 m | |
|
Mitsubishi ASX is smaller. Mitsubishi ASX is 7 cm shorter than the Toyota RAV4, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi ASX is 10 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 384 litres | 586 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1219 litres | 1752 litres | |
|
Toyota RAV4 has more luggage space. Mitsubishi ASX has 202 litres less trunk space than the Toyota RAV4. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Toyota RAV4 (by 533 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi ASX is 0.4 metres less than that of the Toyota RAV4, which means Mitsubishi ASX can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`060 | 2`140 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | high | |
| Mitsubishi ASX has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Toyota RAV4, so Mitsubishi ASX quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 400 | 9800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi ASX has
|
Toyota RAV4 has
| |