Mitsubishi L 200 2012 vs Land Rover Range Rover 2013
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 4.4 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 HP | 339 HP | |
| Torque: | 314 NM | 700 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15 seconds | 6.9 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi L 200 engine produces 203 HP less power than Land Rover Range Rover, whereas torque is 386 NM less than Land Rover Range Rover. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi L 200 reaches 100 km/h speed 8.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.3 | 8.7 | |
| Mitsubishi L 200 consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi L 200 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 105 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 900 km in combined cycle | 1200 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 1380 km on highway | ||
| Land Rover Range Rover gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 560'000 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 Land Rover Range Rover engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 30 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Land Rover Range Rover Sport | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Land Rover Range Rover 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: | 5.19 m | 5.00 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 2.07 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.84 m | |
| Mitsubishi L 200 is 19 cm longer than the Land Rover Range Rover, 32 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi L 200 is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 550 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 2030 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 12.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi L 200 is 0.5 metres less than that of the Land Rover Range Rover, which means Mitsubishi L 200 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`850 | 3`200 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 10 200 | 47 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi L 200 has
|
Land Rover Range Rover has
| |