Audi Q5 2020 vs Mitsubishi Outlander 2015
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.3 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 204 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 360 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.6 seconds | 11.6 seconds | |
|
Audi Q5 is more dynamic to drive. Audi Q5 engine produces 54 HP more power than Mitsubishi Outlander, whereas torque is 40 NM more than Mitsubishi Outlander. Thanks to more power Audi Q5 reaches 100 km/h speed 4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.2 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Audi Q5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Audi Q5 consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means that by driving the Audi Q5 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Audi Q5 consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1200 km in combined cycle | 1030 km in combined cycle | |
| 1300 km on highway | 1150 km on highway | ||
| 900 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
| Audi Q5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 480'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mitsubishi Outlander engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Audi A6, Audi A7 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mitsubishi L 200, Mitsubishi ASX | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Outlander might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Audi Q5 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.68 m | 4.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.89 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.66 m | 1.68 m | |
| Audi Q5 is 1 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Outlander, 9 cm wider, while the height of Audi Q5 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 520 litres | 128 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1520 litres | 1608 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Audi Q5 has 392 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Outlander. The Mitsubishi Outlander 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 Outlander (by 88 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Audi Q5 is 1.2 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means Audi Q5 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`510 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 39 000 | 16 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi Q5 has
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has
| |