Mitsubishi Outlander 2012 vs Jeep Cherokee 2013
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 10.3 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Outlander is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Outlander engine produces 20 HP less power than Jeep Cherokee, but torque is 30 NM more than Jeep Cherokee. Despite less power, Mitsubishi Outlander reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 7.8 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Outlander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Outlander consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Cherokee, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Outlander over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Outlander consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Cherokee. | |||
| 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) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mitsubishi L 200, Mitsubishi ASX | Used also on Jeep Renegade | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.66 m | 4.62 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.86 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.67 m | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander is 3 cm longer than the Jeep Cherokee, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Outlander is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | 412 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
986 litres | no data | |
|
Jeep Cherokee has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mitsubishi Outlander has 192 litres less trunk space than the Jeep Cherokee. 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: | 10.6 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Outlander is 1 metres less than that of the Jeep Cherokee, which means Mitsubishi Outlander can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`170 | 2`475 | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Mitsubishi Outlander scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 8200 | 12 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Outlander has
|
Jeep Cherokee has
| |