Mini Cooper 2007 vs Mitsubishi Colt 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 120 HP | 95 HP | |
| Torque: | 160 NM | 125 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.1 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Mini Cooper is more dynamic to drive. Mini Cooper engine produces 25 HP more power than Mitsubishi Colt, whereas torque is 35 NM more than Mitsubishi Colt. Thanks to more power Mini Cooper reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 6.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.8 l/100km | 6.4 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Mini Cooper consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt, which means that by driving the Mini Cooper 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, Mini Cooper consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 40 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 860 km on highway | 940 km on highway | ||
| 580 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Colt gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 280'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 22 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Smart ForFour | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Colt might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mini Cooper 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. | |||
| Mitsubishi Colt 2005 1.3 engine: The Mitsubishi 4A90 is a 1.3-liter aluminum four-cylinder engine with a timing chain, used mainly in compact Mitsubishi models. It is a simple and lightweight unit designed with fuel economy in mind, but over time several characteristic weaknesses tend ... More about Mitsubishi Colt 2005 1.3 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.70 m | 3.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.52 m | |
|
Mini Cooper is smaller. Mini Cooper is 11 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Colt, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Mini Cooper is 11 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 160 litres | 155 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
680 litres | 760 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mini Cooper is 0.1 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`500 kg | 1`435 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`065 kg | 930 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 435 kg | 505 kg | |
| Mini Cooper load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 16 procentiem less than Mitsubishi Colt. Therefore, Mitsubishi Colt is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mini Cooper has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2800 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mini Cooper has
|
Mitsubishi Colt has
| |