Mitsubishi L 200 2010 vs Ford Ranger 2011
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 2.5 (diesel) | 2.2 - 3.2 (petrol, diesel) | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 - 178 HP | 150 - 200 HP | |
| Torque: | 314 - 400 NM | 226 - 470 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.1 - 17.8 seconds | 10.3 - 12.4 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 - 8.7 | 8.3 - 10.8 | |
|
On average, Mitsubishi L 200 equipped with diesel engines consume 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Ranger. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.16 m | 5.36 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.74 m | |
|
Mitsubishi L 200 is smaller, but higher. Mitsubishi L 200 is 20 cm shorter than the Ford Ranger, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi L 200 is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 1450 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 12.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi L 200 is 0.9 metres less than that of the Ford Ranger, which means Mitsubishi L 200 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`875 | ~ 3`200 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 10 200 | 18 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi L 200 has
|
Ford Ranger has
| |