Ford Ranger 2012 vs Mitsubishi L 200 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 375 NM | 314 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.3 seconds | 15 seconds | |
|
Ford Ranger is more dynamic to drive. Ford Ranger engine produces 14 HP more power than Mitsubishi L 200, whereas torque is 61 NM more than Mitsubishi L 200. Thanks to more power Ford Ranger reaches 100 km/h speed 2.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.5 | 8.3 | |
| Ford Ranger consumes 0.2 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 30 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 940 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 1030 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.36 m | 5.19 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.78 m | |
|
Ford Ranger is larger. Ford Ranger is 17 cm longer than the Mitsubishi L 200, 10 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 | 10 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Ranger has
|
Mitsubishi L 200 has
| |