Isuzu D-Max 2006 vs Mitsubishi L 200 2006
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) | |
| Isuzu D-Max 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, Isuzu D-Max also offers 2-wheel drive versions for fuel economy. 2WD versions also have lower maintenance costs. | |||
| Engines: | 2.5 - 3.0 | 2.5 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 - 163 HP | 136 - 168 HP | |
| Torque: | 280 - 333 NM | 314 - 402 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 20 - 25.7 seconds | 14.6 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 - 9.0 | 8.6 - 9.5 | |
|
On average, Isuzu D-Max equipped with diesel engines consume 0.7 litres less 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: | 5.05 m | 5.08 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.70 m | 1.78 m | |
|
Isuzu D-Max is smaller. Isuzu D-Max is 3 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi L 200, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Isuzu D-Max is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`650 | ~ 2`870 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 8400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Isuzu D-Max has
|
| |