Ford Ranger 2012 vs Mitsubishi L 200 2015
Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
---|---|---|---|
Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.4 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 150 HP | 154 HP | |
Torque: | 375 NM | 380 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.3 seconds | 12.2 seconds | |
Mitsubishi L 200 is a more dynamic driving. Ford Ranger engine produces 4 HP less power than Mitsubishi L 200, whereas torque is 5 NM less than Mitsubishi L 200. Due to the lower power, Ford Ranger reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.5 | 7.1 | |
Real fuel consumption: | 9.6 l/100km | 9.1 l/100km | |
The Mitsubishi L 200 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Ranger consumes 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi L 200, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Ranger could require 210 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Ranger consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi L 200. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 75 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 940 km in combined cycle | 1050 km in combined cycle | |
1030 km on highway | 1200 km on highway | ||
830 km with real consumption | 820 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 5.36 m | 5.21 m | |
Width: | 1.85 m | 1.79 m | |
Height: | 1.82 m | 1.78 m | |
Ford Ranger is larger. Ford Ranger is 15 cm longer than the Mitsubishi L 200, 7 cm wider, while the height of Ford Ranger is 4 cm higher. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 1210 litres | no data | |
Turning diameter: | 12.7 meters | 11.8 meters | |
The turning circle of the Ford Ranger is 0.9 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi L 200, which means Ford Ranger can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | 1`144 | 2`850 | |
Safety: | no data | ||
Quality: | no data | no data | |
Average price (€): | 19 200 | 14 400 | |
Pros and Cons: |
|
Mitsubishi L 200 has
| |