Mitsubishi Outlander 2001 vs Ford Maverick 2000
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 2.0 - 2.4 | 2.0 - 3.0 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 - 201 HP | 124 - 197 HP | |
| Torque: | 176 - 303 NM | 175 - 265 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.7 - 12.3 seconds | 10.5 - 13.5 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.1 - 10.1 | 9.8 - 12.8 | |
|
Mitsubishi Outlander petrol engines consumes on average 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than Ford Maverick. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.54 m | 4.41 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.62 m | 1.73 m | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander is 13 cm longer than the Ford Maverick, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Outlander is 11 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 402 litres | 985 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1705 litres | no data | |
|
Ford Maverick has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mitsubishi Outlander has 583 litres less trunk space than the Ford Maverick. This could mean that the Mitsubishi Outlander uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`041 | ~ 2`020 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Outlander has
|
Ford Maverick has
| |