Chevrolet Colorado 2006 vs Mitsubishi L 200 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.9 Petrol | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 189 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 258 NM | 314 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 14.6 seconds | |
| Chevrolet Colorado engine produces 53 HP more power than Mitsubishi L 200, but torque is 56 NM less than Mitsubishi L 200. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 12.5 | 9.5 | |
|
The Mitsubishi L 200 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Chevrolet Colorado consumes 3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi L 200, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chevrolet Colorado could require 450 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 74 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 590 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 720 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| Mitsubishi L 200 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 530'000 km | 300'000 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 Chevrolet Colorado engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 30 years | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi L 200 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Chevrolet Colorado 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: | 5.26 m | 5.08 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.73 m | 1.78 m | |
| Chevrolet Colorado is 19 cm longer than the Mitsubishi L 200, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Chevrolet Colorado is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 645 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`850 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 8800 | 8400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Colorado has
|
Mitsubishi L 200 has
| |