Mitsubishi ASX 2013 vs Hyundai ix35 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 184 HP | |
| Torque: | 360 NM | 383 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.8 seconds | 10.1 seconds | |
|
Hyundai ix35 is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi ASX engine produces 34 HP less power than Hyundai ix35, whereas torque is 23 NM less than Hyundai ix35. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi ASX reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 7.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.5 l/100km | 8.4 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi ASX is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi ASX consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Hyundai ix35, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi ASX over 15,000 km in a year you can save 195 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi ASX consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Hyundai ix35. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1030 km in combined cycle | 810 km in combined cycle | |
| 1200 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 800 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi ASX gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mitsubishi ASX engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mitsubishi Outlander, Mitsubishi L 200 | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Hyundai Santa FE, Kia Sportage, Hyundai Tucson, Kia Sorento | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Hyundai ix35 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Hyundai ix35 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. | |||
| Hyundai ix35 2010 2.0 engine: The diesel engine is highly reliable when properly maintained, offering an excellent balance of power and fuel efficiency. However, it has several important characteristics and issues that should be ... More about Hyundai ix35 2010 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.30 m | 4.41 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.63 m | 1.67 m | |
|
Mitsubishi ASX is smaller. Mitsubishi ASX is 12 cm shorter than the Hyundai ix35, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi ASX is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 419 litres | 591 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1219 litres | 1436 litres | |
|
Hyundai ix35 has more luggage space. Mitsubishi ASX has 172 litres less trunk space than the Hyundai ix35. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Hyundai ix35 (by 217 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi ASX is 0.2 metres less than that of the Hyundai ix35. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`140 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | below average | |
| Mitsubishi ASX has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Hyundai ix35 has serious deffects in 70 percent more cases than Mitsubishi ASX, so Mitsubishi ASX quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 000 | 7400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi ASX has
|
Hyundai ix35 has
| |