Mitsubishi L 200 2015 vs Dodge Durango 2013
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Diesel | 3.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 154 HP | 294 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 353 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.2 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Mitsubishi L 200 engine produces 140 HP less power than Dodge Durango, but torque is 27 NM more than Dodge Durango. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 11.2 | |
|
The Mitsubishi L 200 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mitsubishi L 200 consumes 4.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Dodge Durango, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi L 200 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 615 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 93 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1050 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 1200 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| Mitsubishi L 200 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 200 mm (7.9 inches) | 207 mm (8.1 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 460'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Dodge Durango engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Jeep Grand Cherokee, Chrysler Grand Voyager, Chrysler 300C, Jeep Wrangler | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Dodge Durango might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Dodge Durango engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.21 m | 5.11 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.92 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.80 m | |
| Mitsubishi L 200 is 10 cm longer than the Dodge Durango, 14 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi L 200 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 5 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 490 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 490 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 2410 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 12.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi L 200 is 0.7 metres less than that of the Dodge Durango, which means Mitsubishi L 200 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`850 | 2`948 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 18 400 | 32 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi L 200 has
|
Dodge Durango has
| |