Mitsubishi Space Star 1998 vs Mitsubishi Space Runner 1999
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 - 1.9 (petrol, diesel) | 2.0 - 2.4 (petrol) | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 82 - 122 HP | 136 - 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 117 - 215 NM | 178 - 225 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 - 14.5 seconds | 10.4 - 13.3 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 - 8.8 | 9.0 - 10.1 | |
|
Mitsubishi Space Star petrol engines consumes on average 1.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than Mitsubishi Space Runner. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.03 m | 4.29 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.65 m | |
| Mitsubishi Space Star is 26 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Space Runner, 2 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Space Star is 13 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 370 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1370 litres | 1800 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi Space Runner has more luggage space. Mitsubishi Space Star has 60 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Space Runner. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Space Runner (by 430 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`698 | ~ 1`900 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Space Star has
|
Mitsubishi Space Runner has
| |