Mitsubishi Colt 1996 vs Mitsubishi Space Star 2016
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 1.3 - 1.6 | 1.0 - 1.2 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 - 103 HP | 71 - 80 HP | |
| Torque: | 108 - 141 NM | 88 - 106 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 - 15.8 seconds | 11.7 - 13.6 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 - 8.4 | 4.1 - 4.2 | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt petrol engines consumes on average 3.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than Mitsubishi Space Star. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.88 m | 3.80 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.67 m | |
| Height: | 1.36 m | 1.51 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is larger, but lower. Mitsubishi Colt is 9 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Space Star, 2 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 15 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 240 litres | 235 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
830 litres | 912 litres | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has 5 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Space Star. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Space Star (by 82 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 9.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 0.8 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Space Star, which means Mitsubishi Colt can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`471 | ~ 1`333 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 6800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Mitsubishi Space Star has
| |