Mitsubishi Colt 1996 vs Citroen C3 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 108 NM | 120 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | 14.2 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Colt and Citroen C3 have the same engine power, but Mitsubishi Colt torque is 12 NM less than Citroen C3. Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 6.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen C3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Colt could require 105 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 650 km with real consumption | ||
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: | 27 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mitsubishi Lancer | 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: | 3.88 m | 3.85 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.67 m | |
| Height: | 1.36 m | 1.52 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is larger, but lower. Mitsubishi Colt is 3 cm longer than the Citroen C3, 1 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 16 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 240 litres | 305 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
830 litres | 1150 litres | |
|
Citroen C3 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mitsubishi Colt has 65 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 320 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 0.5 metres less than that of the Citroen C3, which means Mitsubishi Colt can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`445 | 1`470 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen C3 has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Citroen C3 has
| |