Mitsubishi Lancer 2004 reviews
| Purchase year: | 2005 (new car) | Owned for: | 130`000 kilometers (11 years) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average fuel consumption: | 9.0 litres per 100km (30% urban driving) | ||
Would recomend this car to the friend
Pros: Good quality, repairs made as an annual maintenance; never something broken between maintenance intervals
Cons: High fuel consumption; on 8-9 year rust appeared on bodywork
| Purchase year: | 2008 (age of car 2 years) | Owned for: | 120`000 kilometers (9 years) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average fuel consumption: | 9.0 litres per 100km (90% urban driving) | ||
| Total cost of repairs: | 650 € (~ 72 € per year) | ||
Would recomend this car to the friend
Pros: A highly durable, reliable.
Cons: As a city car, it is not very economical, loudy onto highway. After 7th year starts intensively to rust.
| Purchase year: | 2007 (new car) | Owned for: | 185`000 kilometers (9 years) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average fuel consumption: | 5.0 litres per 100km (20% urban driving) | ||
Would recomend this car to the friend
| Purchase year: | 2006 (age of car 2 years) | Owned for: | 190`000 kilometers (10 years) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average fuel consumption: | 8.0 litres per 100km (80% urban driving) | ||
Would recomend this car to the friend
| Purchase year: | 2016 (age of car 10 years) | Owned for: | 19`000 kilometers (1 year) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average fuel consumption: | 8.0 litres per 100km (40% urban driving) | ||
Would recomend this car to the friend
| Purchase year: | 2007 (new car) | Owned for: | 150`000 kilometers (8 years) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average fuel consumption: | 7.0 litres per 100km (30% urban driving) | ||
Would recomend this car to the friend
| Purchase year: | 2020 (age of car 12 years) | Owned for: | 30`000 kilometers (3 years) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average fuel consumption: | 11.0 litres per 100km (70% urban driving) | ||
| Total cost of repairs: | 270 € (~ 90 € per year) | ||
Would recomend this car to the friend
Pros: Comfort, dynamic behaviour, good power, reliability, design, fuel economy on the road
Cons: A bit big for the city, slightly high fuel consumption in the city. Luggage compartment fair.