Mitsubishi L 200 1996 vs Toyota Land Cruiser 1996
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 3.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 100 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 295 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 14.9 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi L 200 engine produces 25 HP less power than Toyota Land Cruiser, whereas torque is 55 NM less than Toyota Land Cruiser. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | no data | 11.1 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 90 litres | |
| 720 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
| 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) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 30 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mitsubishi Pajero | Used only for this car | |
| 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: | 4.50 m | 4.73 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.73 m | |
| Height: | 1.57 m | 1.86 m | |
|
Mitsubishi L 200 is smaller. Mitsubishi L 200 is 23 cm shorter than the Toyota Land Cruiser, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi L 200 is 29 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 742 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1150 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 11.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`835 | 2`680 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 4400 | 6600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi L 200 has
|
Toyota Land Cruiser has
| |