Mitsubishi L 200 2015 vs Ford Ranger 2015
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 181 HP | 130 HP | |
| Torque: | 430 NM | 330 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 14.9 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi L 200 is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi L 200 engine produces 51 HP more power than Ford Ranger, whereas torque is 100 NM more than Ford Ranger. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi L 200 reaches 100 km/h speed 4.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 7.0 | |
| Mitsubishi L 200 consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Ranger, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi L 200 could require 15 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1050 km in combined cycle | 1140 km in combined cycle | |
| 1220 km on highway | 1230 km on highway | ||
| Ford Ranger 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) | |
| Ground clearance: | 200 mm (7.9 inches) | 237 mm (9.3 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Ford Ranger can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.21 m | 5.36 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.86 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.80 m | |
|
Mitsubishi L 200 is smaller. Mitsubishi L 200 is 16 cm shorter than the Ford Ranger, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi L 200 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight: | 2`905 kg | 3`200 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`860 kg | 2`014 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 1`045 kg | 1`186 kg | |
| Mitsubishi L 200 load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 13 procentiem less than Ford Ranger. Therefore, Ford Ranger is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 13 600 | 29 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi L 200 has
|
Ford Ranger has
| |