Ford Ranger 2015 vs Mitsubishi L 200 2018
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.3 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 160 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 385 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.8 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Ford Ranger engine produces 10 HP more power than Mitsubishi L 200, but torque is 15 NM less than Mitsubishi L 200. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 7.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.9 l/100km | 9.2 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Ranger is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Ranger consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi L 200, which means that by driving the Ford Ranger over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Ranger consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi L 200. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1120 km in combined cycle | 980 km in combined cycle | |
| 890 km with real consumption | 810 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford Ranger 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) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.36 m | 5.31 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.78 m | |
|
Ford Ranger is larger. Ford Ranger is 6 cm longer than the Mitsubishi L 200, 5 cm wider, while the height of Ford Ranger is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 1061 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 11.8 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`200 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 25 200 | 27 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Ranger has
|
| |