Mitsubishi L 200 2015 vs Ford Ranger 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Diesel | 3.2 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 181 HP | 200 HP | |
| Torque: | 430 NM | 470 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.8 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
Ford Ranger is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi L 200 engine produces 19 HP less power than Ford Ranger, whereas torque is 40 NM less than Ford Ranger. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi L 200 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.5 | 10.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.8 l/100km | 13.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi L 200 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi L 200 consumes 2.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Ranger, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi L 200 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 435 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi L 200 consumes 2.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Ranger. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 1110 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi L 200 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.21 m | 5.36 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.82 m | |
|
Mitsubishi L 200 is smaller. Mitsubishi L 200 is 15 cm shorter than the Ford Ranger, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi L 200 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 1210 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`850 | 1`109 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 14 200 | 19 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi L 200 has
|
Ford Ranger has
| |