Mitsubishi L 200 2018 vs Ford Ranger 2015
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Diesel | 3.2 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 200 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 470 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Mitsubishi L 200 engine produces 50 HP less power than Ford Ranger, whereas torque is 70 NM less than Ford Ranger. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 8.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.4 l/100km | 11.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi L 200 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi L 200 consumes 0.7 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 105 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi L 200 consumes 1.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Ranger. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 960 km in combined cycle | 940 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.31 m | 5.36 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.86 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.82 m | |
|
Mitsubishi L 200 is smaller. Mitsubishi L 200 is 6 cm shorter than the Ford Ranger, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi L 200 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 1061 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 3`200 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 30 000 | 31 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi L 200 has
|
Ford Ranger has
| |