Mitsubishi Pajero 2000 vs Land Rover Freelander 2000
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.5 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 202 HP | 117 HP | |
| Torque: | 318 NM | 160 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 12.6 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Pajero is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Pajero engine produces 85 HP more power than Land Rover Freelander, whereas torque is 158 NM more than Land Rover Freelander. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Pajero reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 14.2 | 10.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 15.7 l/100km | 10.5 l/100km | |
|
The Land Rover Freelander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Pajero consumes 3.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Freelander, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Pajero could require 570 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Pajero consumes 5.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Freelander. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 71 litres | 59 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 500 km in combined cycle | 560 km in combined cycle | |
| 630 km on highway | 690 km on highway | ||
| 450 km with real consumption | 560 km with real consumption | ||
| Land Rover Freelander gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.28 m | 4.38 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.84 m | 1.76 m | |
| Mitsubishi Pajero is 10 cm shorter than the Land Rover Freelander, 8 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Pajero is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Pajero is 1 metres less than that of the Land Rover Freelander, which means Mitsubishi Pajero can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`800 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | average | |
| Mitsubishi Pajero has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Land Rover Freelander has serious deffects in 60 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Pajero, so Mitsubishi Pajero quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4000 | 1800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Pajero has
|
Land Rover Freelander has
| |