Mitsubishi L 200 2006 vs Mazda CX-9 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 3.5 Petrol | |
| 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: | 168 HP | 263 HP | |
| Torque: | 402 NM | 339 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Mitsubishi L 200 engine produces 95 HP less power than Mazda CX-9, but torque is 63 NM more than Mazda CX-9. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | no data | 11.5 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 76 litres | |
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 420'000 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 Mazda CX-9 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 30 years | 1 years | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi L 200 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | no data | 5.07 m | |
| Width: | no data | 1.94 m | |
| Height: | no data | 1.73 m | |
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 487 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 487 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 2852 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`910 | 2`635 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 8400 | 6800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi L 200 has
|
Mazda CX-9 has
| |