Mitsubishi Colt 1996 vs Mitsubishi ASX 2010
| Body: | Hatchback | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 117 HP | |
| Torque: | 137 NM | 154 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 11.4 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 27 HP less power than Mitsubishi ASX, whereas torque is 17 NM less than Mitsubishi ASX. Despite less power, Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.3 | 6.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi ASX is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi ASX, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Colt could require 195 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi ASX. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 1050 km in combined cycle | |
| 860 km on highway | 1260 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 910 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi ASX gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.88 m | 4.30 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.36 m | 1.62 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is smaller. Mitsubishi Colt is 42 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi ASX, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 26 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 240 litres | 419 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
830 litres | 1219 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi ASX has more luggage space. Mitsubishi Colt has 179 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi ASX. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi ASX (by 389 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 0.6 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi ASX, which means Mitsubishi Colt can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`480 | 1`870 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 6200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Mitsubishi ASX has
| |