Ford Ranger 2015 vs Mitsubishi L 200 2015
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ford Ranger is available with rear wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive, while Mitsubishi L 200 can be equipped only with four wheel (4x4) drive. All-wheel drive models tend to consume more fuel, so if you don't need off road capabilities, Ford Ranger also offers 2-wheel drive versions for fuel economy. 2WD versions also have lower maintenance costs. | |||
| Engines: | 2.2 - 3.2 | 2.4 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 130 - 200 HP | 154 - 181 HP | |
| Torque: | 330 - 470 NM | 380 - 430 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.3 - 14.9 seconds | 10.4 - 12.2 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.0 - 8.7 | 7.1 - 7.5 | |
|
On average, Ford Ranger equipped with diesel engines consume 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi L 200. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.36 m | 5.21 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.80 m | 1.78 m | |
|
Ford Ranger is larger. Ford Ranger is 16 cm longer than the Mitsubishi L 200, 5 cm wider, while the height of Ford Ranger is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 11.8 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 3`200 | ~ 2`864 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 35 200 | 16 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Ranger has
|
Mitsubishi L 200 has
| |