Citroen C-Crosser 2011 vs Mitsubishi Outlander 2009
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 147 HP | 147 HP | |
| Torque: | 199 NM | 199 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.3 seconds | 12.2 seconds | |
| Citroen C-Crosser and Mitsubishi Outlander have the same engine power, the torque is the same for both cars. Citroen C-Crosser reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.3 | 7.4 | |
|
The Mitsubishi Outlander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Citroen C-Crosser consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen C-Crosser could require 135 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| Mitsubishi Outlander 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) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Ground clearance: | 174 mm (6.9 inches) | 215 mm (8.5 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mitsubishi Outlander can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Mitsubishi Outlander version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. Choose from four 4x4 versions of Mitsubishi Outlander 2009 if off-road driveability is important to you. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.65 m | 4.67 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.67 m | 1.68 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Citroen C-Crosser is 2 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Outlander, 1 cm wider, while the height of Citroen C-Crosser is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 441 litres | 774 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1686 litres | 1691 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has more luggage space. Citroen C-Crosser has 333 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Outlander. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Outlander (by 5 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen C-Crosser is 1.4 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means Citroen C-Crosser can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`070 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 5800 | 5800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen C-Crosser has
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has
| |