Mitsubishi Colt 2007 vs Mitsubishi Space Star 2016
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 95 HP | 80 HP | |
| Torque: | 125 NM | 106 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.1 seconds | 11.7 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 15 HP more power than Mitsubishi Space Star, whereas torque is 19 NM more than Mitsubishi Space Star. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 4.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.5 l/100km | 5.3 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Space Star is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Space Star, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Colt could require 255 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Space Star. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 35 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 970 km on highway | 940 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 660 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 320'000 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 Space Star engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 21 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Smart ForFour | Used only for this car | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.87 m | 3.80 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.67 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.51 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is larger. Mitsubishi Colt is 8 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Space Star, 3 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | 235 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
854 litres | 912 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Mitsubishi Colt has 15 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Space Star. This could mean that the Mitsubishi Colt uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Space Star (by 58 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 9.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 1.6 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Space Star, which means Mitsubishi Colt can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`340 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 6200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Mitsubishi Space Star has
| |