Mitsubishi Lancer 2004 vs Ford Focus 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 98 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 150 NM | 155 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.8 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
|
Ford Focus is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Lancer engine produces 17 HP less power than Ford Focus, whereas torque is 5 NM less than Ford Focus. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Lancer reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 6.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 7.9 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Lancer is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Mitsubishi Lancer consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Focus, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Lancer could require 45 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mitsubishi Lancer consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Focus. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 1070 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford Focus gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mitsubishi Space Star | Used also on Ford C-Max | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Lancer might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mitsubishi Lancer 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: | 4.48 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Lancer is smaller. Mitsubishi Lancer is 1 cm shorter than the Ford Focus, 15 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 467 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 931 litres | |
|
Ford Focus has more luggage space. Mitsubishi Lancer has 37 litres less trunk space than the Ford Focus. | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`750 | 1`765 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.7/10 | 7.9/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Lancer has
|
Ford Focus has
| |