Toyota Land Cruiser 1996 vs Mitsubishi Pajero 2000
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 2.7 - 3.4 | 2.5 - 3.5 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 - 178 HP | 100 - 202 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 - 343 NM | 240 - 373 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.7 - 14.9 seconds | 10 - 17.8 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.5 - 14.1 | 9.5 - 14.2 | |
|
Toyota Land Cruiser petrol engines consumes on average 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than Mitsubishi Pajero. On average, Toyota Land Cruiser equipped with diesel engines consume 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Pajero. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.64 m | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.87 m | |
| Height: | 1.86 m | 1.84 m | |
| Toyota Land Cruiser is 36 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Pajero, 13 cm narrower, while the height of Toyota Land Cruiser is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 1150 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1150 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota Land Cruiser is 0.8 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Pajero, which means Toyota Land Cruiser can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`663 | ~ 2`800 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 7000 | 4000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Land Cruiser has
|
Mitsubishi Pajero has
| |