Land Rover Range Rover 1989 vs Mitsubishi Pajero 1994
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.8 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 121 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 284 NM | 292 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 19.5 seconds | 17.3 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Pajero is a more dynamic driving. Land Rover Range Rover engine produces 4 HP less power than Mitsubishi Pajero, whereas torque is 8 NM less than Mitsubishi Pajero. Due to the lower power, Land Rover Range Rover reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.3 | 12.4 | |
|
The Land Rover Range Rover is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Land Rover Range Rover consumes 2.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Pajero, which means that by driving the Land Rover Range Rover over 15,000 km in a year you can save 315 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 92 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 740 km in combined cycle | |
| 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) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.81 m | 1.88 m | |
| Land Rover Range Rover is 22 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Pajero, 12 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 1080 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 2050 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover is 0.1 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Pajero. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`500 | 3`300 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 9800 | 4000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover has
|
Mitsubishi Pajero has
| |