Mitsubishi L 200 2006 vs Nissan Navara 2005
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Mitsubishi L 200 is available only with four wheel (4x4) drive, while Nissan Navara can be equipped with rear wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive. All-wheel drive models tend to consume more fuel, so if you don't need off road capabilities, Nissan Navara also offers 2-wheel drive versions for fuel economy. 2WD versions also have lower maintenance costs. | |||
| Engines: | 2.5 (diesel) | 2.5 - 4.0 (petrol, diesel) | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 - 168 HP | 174 - 265 HP | |
| Torque: | 314 - 402 NM | 385 - 403 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.6 seconds | 11.4 - 11.5 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.6 - 9.5 | 8.5 - 13.8 | |
|
On average, Mitsubishi L 200 equipped with diesel engines consume 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Navara. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.08 m | 5.22 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.78 m | |
|
Mitsubishi L 200 is smaller. Mitsubishi L 200 is 15 cm shorter than the Nissan Navara, 5 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 13.3 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`870 | ~ 3`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 8400 | 6000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi L 200 has
|
Nissan Navara has
| |