Mitsubishi Outlander 2006 vs Volvo XC60 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.4 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 310 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander engine produces 23 HP less power than Volvo XC60, whereas torque is 30 NM less than Volvo XC60. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.5 | 8.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 8.6 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 Volvo XC60, 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 Volvo XC60. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 930 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 760 km with real consumption | 810 km with real consumption | ||
| 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) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.64 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.71 m | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander is 1 cm longer than the Volvo XC60, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Outlander is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 541 litres | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1691 litres | 1455 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has more luggage capacity. Mitsubishi Outlander has 46 litres more trunk space than the Volvo XC60. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Outlander (by 236 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Outlander is 0.5 metres less than that of the Volvo XC60, which means Mitsubishi Outlander can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`350 | 2`505 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Volvo XC60 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Outlander has serious deffects in 140 percent more cases than Volvo XC60, so Volvo XC60 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3000 | 8000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.9/10 | 7.1/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Outlander has
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |