Mitsubishi Colt 2004 vs Citroen C3 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 95 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 125 NM | 120 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.1 seconds | 14.2 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 20 HP more power than Citroen C3, whereas torque is 5 NM more than Citroen C3. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 3.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 6.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.5 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C3, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Colt over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 970 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 650 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Colt gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 280'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Smart ForFour | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen Xsara, Peugeot 206, Citroen Berlingo | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.87 m | 3.85 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.67 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.52 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mitsubishi Colt is 2 cm longer than the Citroen C3, 3 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 155 litres | 305 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
760 litres | 1150 litres | |
|
Citroen C3 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mitsubishi Colt has 150 litres less trunk space than the Citroen C3. 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 Citroen C3 (by 390 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 0.3 metres more than that of the Citroen C3. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`435 | 1`470 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | below average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen C3 has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Citroen C3 has
| |