Mitsubishi ASX 2016 vs Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 360 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.8 seconds | 10.8 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi ASX and Land Rover Range Rover Evoque have the same engine power, but Mitsubishi ASX torque is 40 NM less than Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 5.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.7 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km | |
|
The Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Mitsubishi ASX consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi ASX could require 15 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi ASX consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1030 km in combined cycle | 1050 km in combined cycle | |
| 1200 km on highway | 1150 km on highway | ||
| 770 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 560'000 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 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mitsubishi Outlander, Mitsubishi L 200 | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Land Rover Freelander, Jaguar XF | |
| 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 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 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: | 4.36 m | 4.36 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.63 m | 1.61 m | |
| Mitsubishi ASX and Land Rover Range Rover Evoque are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 419 litres | 550 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1219 litres | no data | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has more luggage space. Mitsubishi ASX has 131 litres less trunk space than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi ASX is 0.7 metres less than that of the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, which means Mitsubishi ASX can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`060 | 2`350 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 13 200 | 23 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi ASX has
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has
| |