Land Rover Defender 2002 vs Mitsubishi Pajero 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Double-row timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 122 HP | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 300 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 17.5 seconds | 17.8 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Defender is more dynamic to drive. Land Rover Defender engine produces 22 HP more power than Mitsubishi Pajero, whereas torque is 60 NM more than Mitsubishi Pajero. Thanks to more power Land Rover Defender reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.1 | 10.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.8 l/100km | 10.3 l/100km | |
|
By specification Land Rover Defender consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Pajero, which means that by driving the Land Rover Defender over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Land Rover Defender consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Pajero. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 71 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 590 km in combined cycle | 660 km in combined cycle | |
| 660 km on highway | 780 km on highway | ||
| 550 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Pajero gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 30 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Land Rover Discovery | 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. Mitsubishi Pajero might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.88 m | 4.26 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 2.08 m | 1.84 m | |
|
Land Rover Defender is smaller, but higher. Land Rover Defender is 38 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Pajero, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Land Rover Defender is 24 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 12.3 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Defender is 1.7 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Pajero, which means Land Rover Defender can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`500 | 2`800 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 3800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Defender has
|
Mitsubishi Pajero has
| |