Mitsubishi L 200 1996 vs Honda CR-V 2004

Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison

 
Mitsubishi L 200
1996 - 2006
Honda CR-V
2004 - 2006
Gearbox: Manual/AutomaticManual/Automatic
Wheel drive type: Rear wheel drive (RWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4)All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4)
Mitsubishi L 200 is available with rear wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive, while Honda CR-V can be equipped only with four wheel (4x4) drive. All-wheel drive models tend to consume more fuel, so if you don't need off road capabilities, Mitsubishi L 200 also offers 2-wheel drive versions for fuel economy. 2WD versions also have lower maintenance costs.
Engines: 2.0 - 2.52.0 - 2.4

Performance

Power: 87 - 132 HP140 - 162 HP
Torque: 154 - 240 NM190 - 340 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 23.7 seconds10.6 - 12 seconds
Select a car version for a more accurate comparison!

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 9.76.7 - 10.1
On average, Mitsubishi L 200 equipped with diesel engines consume 3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V.
This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version!
Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy.

Dimensions

Length: 4.64 m4.61 m
Width: 1.66 m1.78 m
Height: 1.63 m1.71 m
Mitsubishi L 200 is 3 cm longer than the Honda CR-V, 12 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi L 200 is 8 cm lower.
Trunk capacity: no data527 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
no data952 litres
Turning diameter: no data10.6 meters
Gross weight (kg): ~ 2`690~ 1`910
Safety: no datano data
Quality: no data
above average
Average price (€): 46002800
Pros and Cons: Mitsubishi L 200 has
  • also available in 2WD
Honda CR-V has
  • lower fuel consumption for diesel engines
  • lower price
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv