Mitsubishi Outlander 2006 vs Citroen C-Crosser 2007
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Petrol | 2.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 160 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 213 NM | 232 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.2 seconds | 10.8 seconds | |
|
Citroen C-Crosser is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Outlander engine produces 10 HP less power than Citroen C-Crosser, whereas torque is 19 NM less than Citroen C-Crosser. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Outlander reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.1 | 9.3 | |
|
The Citroen C-Crosser is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mitsubishi Outlander consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C-Crosser, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Outlander could require 120 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 580 km in combined cycle | 640 km in combined cycle | |
| Citroen C-Crosser gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 21 years | 18 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Galant, Mitsubishi Grandis, Mitsubishi Eclipse | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mitsubishi Outlander, Peugeot 4007 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Outlander might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.54 m | 4.65 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.62 m | 1.67 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Outlander is smaller. Mitsubishi Outlander is 11 cm shorter than the Citroen C-Crosser, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Outlander is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 402 litres | 184 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 184 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 402 litres | 441 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1691 litres | 1686 litres | |
| In 5-seat version Citroen C-Crosser has more luggage space (by 39 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Outlander (by 5 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Outlander is 0.6 metres less than that of the Citroen C-Crosser, which means Mitsubishi Outlander can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`300 | 2`410 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 3400 | 6200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Outlander has
|
Citroen C-Crosser has
| |