Mitsubishi Carisma 1996 vs Mitsubishi Carisma 2001
| Body: | Sedan | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 102 HP | |
| Torque: | 176 NM | 215 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.2 seconds | 11.9 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Carisma 2001 is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Carisma 1996 engine produces 12 HP less power than Mitsubishi Carisma 2001, whereas torque is 39 NM less than Mitsubishi Carisma 2001. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Carisma 1996 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.9 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mitsubishi Carisma 1996 consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Carisma 2001, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Carisma 1996 could require 75 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mitsubishi Carisma 1996 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Carisma 2001. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 1090 km in combined cycle | |
| 1250 km on highway | 1330 km on highway | ||
| 1010 km with real consumption | 1000 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 18 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volvo V40, Volvo S40 | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volvo V40, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Volvo S40 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.45 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.40 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mitsubishi Carisma 1996 is 4 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Carisma 2001, width is practically the same also the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 460 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
430 litres | 1050 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Mitsubishi Carisma 1996 has 30 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Carisma 2001. The Mitsubishi Carisma 2001 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Carisma 2001 (by 620 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`675 | 1`795 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | Mitsubishi Carisma 2001 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Carisma 1996 has serious deffects in 150 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Carisma 2001, so Mitsubishi Carisma 2001 quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.9/10 | 7.9/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Carisma has
|
Mitsubishi Carisma has
| |