Mitsubishi Space Runner 1997 vs Chrysler Voyager 1991
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 133 HP | 99 HP | |
| Torque: | 176 NM | 179 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.2 seconds | 15.2 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Space Runner is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Space Runner engine produces 34 HP more power than Chrysler Voyager, but torque is 3 NM less than Chrysler Voyager. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Space Runner reaches 100 km/h speed 4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.6 | 10.3 | |
|
The Mitsubishi Space Runner is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mitsubishi Space Runner consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler Voyager, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Space Runner over 15,000 km in a year you can save 105 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 570 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| Chrysler Voyager gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.27 m | 4.52 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.83 m | |
| Height: | 1.66 m | 1.67 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Space Runner is smaller. Mitsubishi Space Runner is 25 cm shorter than the Chrysler Voyager, 13 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Space Runner is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 676 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1498 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 12.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Space Runner is 2.3 metres less than that of the Chrysler Voyager, which means Mitsubishi Space Runner can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`745 | 1`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 600 | 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Space Runner has
|
Chrysler Voyager has
| |