Jeep Wrangler 2002 vs Mitsubishi Pajero 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Petrol | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Jeep Wrangler) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Mitsubishi Pajero) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 143 HP | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 215 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 17.8 seconds | |
|
Jeep Wrangler is more dynamic to drive. Jeep Wrangler engine produces 43 HP more power than Mitsubishi Pajero, but torque is 25 NM less than Mitsubishi Pajero. Thanks to more power Jeep Wrangler reaches 100 km/h speed 5.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.4 | 10.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.4 l/100km | 10.3 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Pajero is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Jeep Wrangler consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Pajero, which means that by driving the Jeep Wrangler over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Jeep Wrangler consumes 2.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Pajero. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 76 litres | 71 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 660 km in combined cycle | |
| 910 km on highway | 780 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
| 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) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 30 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Chrysler Grand Voyager, Chrysler Voyager, Jeep Cherokee, Dodge Grand Caravan | Used also on Mitsubishi L 200 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Jeep Wrangler engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| Jeep Wrangler 2002 2.4 engine: This engine features a thin-walled cast-iron cylinder block, an aluminum cylinder head with dual overhead camshafts, a timing belt system, two balance shafts, hydraulic lifters, a dual-mass flywheel, and a dampened crankshaft pulley. It has received numerous ... More about Jeep Wrangler 2002 2.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.95 m | 4.26 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.84 m | |
|
Jeep Wrangler is smaller. Jeep Wrangler is 31 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Pajero, 16 cm narrower, while the height of Jeep Wrangler is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 320 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1045 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Wrangler is 0.4 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Pajero, which means Jeep Wrangler can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | 2`800 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 9400 | 3800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Wrangler has
|
Mitsubishi Pajero has
| |