Mitsubishi ASX 2019 vs Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2015
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 195 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 10 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi ASX and Land Rover Range Rover Evoque have the same engine power, but Mitsubishi ASX torque is 185 NM less than Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. Mitsubishi ASX reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.5 | 5.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 7.9 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mitsubishi ASX consumes 1.4 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 210 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mitsubishi ASX consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 57 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 960 km in combined cycle | 1110 km in combined cycle | |
| 1080 km on highway | 1260 km on highway | ||
| 800 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 18 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi Outlander, Peugeot 4008 | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Jaguar XF, Jaguar XE, Land Rover Discovery Sport | |
| 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: | 4.37 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.99 m | |
| Height: | 1.64 m | 1.66 m | |
|
Mitsubishi ASX is smaller. Mitsubishi ASX and Land Rover Range Rover Evoque are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 406 litres | 575 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1206 litres | no data | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has more luggage space. Mitsubishi ASX has 169 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): | 1`970 | 2`350 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 18 800 | 21 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi ASX has
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has
| |