Ford Maverick 2000 vs Mitsubishi Outlander 2001
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 2.0 - 3.0 | 2.0 - 2.4 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 124 - 197 HP | 136 - 201 HP | |
| Torque: | 175 - 265 NM | 176 - 303 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 - 13.5 seconds | 7.7 - 12.3 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.8 - 12.8 | 9.1 - 10.1 | |
|
Ford Maverick petrol engines consumes on average 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than Mitsubishi Outlander. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.41 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.73 m | 1.62 m | |
| Ford Maverick is 13 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Outlander, 4 cm wider, while the height of Ford Maverick is 11 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 985 litres | 402 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1705 litres | |
|
Ford Maverick has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Ford Maverick has 583 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. | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 11.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`020 | ~ 2`041 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Maverick has
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has
| |