Audi Q5 2012 vs Mitsubishi Outlander 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 2.3 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 245 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 580 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.5 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Audi Q5 is more dynamic to drive. Audi Q5 engine produces 95 HP more power than Mitsubishi Outlander, whereas torque is 200 NM more than Mitsubishi Outlander. Thanks to more power Audi Q5 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 5.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.7 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Outlander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Audi Q5 consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Audi Q5 could require 150 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Audi Q5 consumes 1.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1170 km in combined cycle | 1110 km in combined cycle | |
| 1250 km on highway | 1270 km on highway | ||
| 860 km with real consumption | 840 km with real consumption | ||
| 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: | 420'000 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: | 4 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on 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: | 4.63 m | 4.66 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.66 m | 1.68 m | |
| Audi Q5 is 3 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Outlander, 10 cm wider, while the height of Audi Q5 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | 220 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1560 litres | 986 litres | |
|
Audi Q5 has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Audi Q5 has 320 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 Audi Q5 (by 574 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Audi Q5 is 1 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`470 | 2`170 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | below average | |
| Audi Q5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Outlander has serious deffects in 110 percent more cases than Audi Q5, so Audi Q5 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 13 800 | 8400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi Q5 has
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has
| |