Land Rover Range Rover 2013 vs Mitsubishi Pajero 2014
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 5.0 Petrol | 3.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | 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: | 510 HP | 178 HP | |
| Torque: | 625 NM | 261 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 5.4 seconds | 12.6 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is more dynamic to drive. Land Rover Range Rover engine produces 332 HP more power than Mitsubishi Pajero, whereas torque is 364 NM more than Mitsubishi Pajero. Thanks to more power Land Rover Range Rover reaches 100 km/h speed 7.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 13.8 | 12.2 | |
|
The Mitsubishi Pajero is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Land Rover Range Rover consumes 1.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Pajero, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Range Rover could require 240 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 105 litres | 88 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 1060 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| Land Rover Range Rover 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: | 16 years | 32 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Land Rover Range Rover Sport, Jaguar XJ | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mitsubishi Pajero 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.00 m | 4.90 m | |
| Width: | 2.07 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.84 m | 1.87 m | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is larger, but slightly lower. Land Rover Range Rover is 10 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Pajero, 20 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 663 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2030 litres | no data | |
|
Mitsubishi Pajero has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Land Rover Range Rover has 113 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Pajero. This could mean that the Land Rover Range Rover uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.3 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover is 0.9 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Pajero, which means Land Rover Range Rover can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`150 | 2`810 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 47 800 | 19 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover has
|
Mitsubishi Pajero has
| |