Mitsubishi Outlander 2012 vs Citroen C-Crosser 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 156 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander engine produces 6 HP less power than Citroen C-Crosser, the torque is the same for both cars. Despite less power, Mitsubishi Outlander reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Outlander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Outlander consumes 1.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C-Crosser, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Outlander over 15,000 km in a year you can save 270 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Outlander consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C-Crosser. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1110 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 1270 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 840 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Outlander 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) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 480'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mitsubishi L 200, Mitsubishi ASX | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mitsubishi Outlander, Peugeot 4007 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Outlander might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Citroen C-Crosser 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: | 4.66 m | 4.65 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.67 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mitsubishi Outlander and Citroen C-Crosser are practically the same length. | |||
| Seats: | 5 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | 184 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 184 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 220 litres | 441 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
986 litres | 1686 litres | |
| In 5-seat version Citroen C-Crosser has more luggage space (by 221 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Citroen C-Crosser (by 700 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Outlander is 1.4 metres less than that of the Citroen C-Crosser, which means Mitsubishi Outlander can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`170 | 2`410 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 8200 | 6000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Outlander has
|
Citroen C-Crosser has
| |