Mitsubishi ASX 2019 vs Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Mitsubishi ASX) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Land Rover Range Rover Evoque) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 195 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 9.6 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 205 NM less than Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. Mitsubishi ASX reaches 100 km/h speed 2.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.5 | no data | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 60 litres | |
| 810 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 19 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi Outlander, Peugeot 4008 | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Land Rover Freelander, Jaguar XF, 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. Mitsubishi ASX might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| 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. | |||
| Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2013 2.2 engine: This engine is recognized for its reliability, power, and relatively low fuel consumption, as well as its durability in demanding conditions without frequent failures. However, it is sensitible to oil quality ... More about Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2013 2.2 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.37 m | 4.36 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.64 m | 1.61 m | |
| Mitsubishi ASX is 1 cm longer than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, 13 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi ASX is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 406 litres | 550 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1206 litres | no data | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mitsubishi ASX has 144 litres less trunk space than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. This could mean that the Mitsubishi ASX uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| 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 | ||
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 14 800 | 20 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi ASX has
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has
| |