Mitsubishi Outlander 2012 vs Chevrolet Captiva 2011
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 251 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Outlander is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Outlander engine produces 13 HP less power than Chevrolet Captiva, but torque is 129 NM more than Chevrolet Captiva. Despite less power, Mitsubishi Outlander reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 6.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 7.9 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Outlander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Outlander consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Captiva, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Outlander over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Outlander consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Captiva. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1110 km in combined cycle | 1040 km in combined cycle | |
| 1270 km on highway | 1220 km on highway | ||
| 840 km with real consumption | 820 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Outlander gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.66 m | 4.67 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.73 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Outlander is smaller. Mitsubishi Outlander is 2 cm shorter than the Chevrolet Captiva, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Outlander is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | 477 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
986 litres | 1577 litres | |
|
Chevrolet Captiva has more luggage space. Mitsubishi Outlander has 257 litres less trunk space than the Chevrolet Captiva. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Chevrolet Captiva (by 591 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 12.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Outlander is 1.7 metres less than that of the Chevrolet Captiva, which means Mitsubishi Outlander can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Electric power steering | Hydraulic power steering | |
| Electric power steering is simpler, quieter, more fuel-efficient, more configurable and provides additional features such as auto-steering for lane assist and parking. The disadvantages of electric power steering are possible overheating under prolonged load conditions and insufficient feedback (feeling) during steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`170 | 2`505 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mitsubishi Outlander scores higher in safety tests. The Mitsubishi Outlander scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chevrolet Captiva has serious deffects in 95 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Outlander, so Mitsubishi Outlander quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 9200 | 6600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Outlander has
|
Chevrolet Captiva has
| |