Mitsubishi Colt 2000 vs Toyota Corolla 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 82 HP | 96 HP | |
| Torque: | 120 NM | 130 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | 11.8 seconds | |
|
Toyota Corolla is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 14 HP less power than Toyota Corolla, whereas torque is 10 NM less than Toyota Corolla. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 6.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Corolla, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Colt could require 15 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Corolla. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 730 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 870 km on highway | ||
| 750 km with real consumption | 700 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 | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi Carisma, Mitsubishi Space Star | Used also on Toyota Auris | |
| 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: | 3.88 m | 4.29 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.36 m | 1.38 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is smaller. Mitsubishi Colt is 41 cm shorter than the Toyota Corolla, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 240 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
830 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 9.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 0.4 metres more than that of the Toyota Corolla, which means Mitsubishi Colt can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`445 | 1`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Toyota Corolla has
| |