Mitsubishi Outlander 2015 vs Volvo XC60 2017
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 190 HP | |
| Torque: | 360 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.6 seconds | 8.4 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC60 is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Outlander engine produces 40 HP less power than Volvo XC60, whereas torque is 40 NM less than Volvo XC60. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Outlander reaches 100 km/h speed 3.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 5.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo XC60 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Outlander consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Outlander could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Outlander consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1030 km in combined cycle | 1150 km in combined cycle | |
| 1150 km on highway | 1270 km on highway | ||
| 740 km with real consumption | 820 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo XC60 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 190 mm (7.5 inches) | 216 mm (8.5 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Volvo XC60 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 380'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mitsubishi Outlander engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mitsubishi L 200, Mitsubishi ASX | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volvo V40, Volvo V60, Volvo V40 Cross Country, Volvo S90 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.70 m | 4.69 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 2.00 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.66 m | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander and Volvo XC60 are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 128 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1608 litres | 1432 litres | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander has 377 litres less trunk space than the Volvo XC60. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Outlander (by 176 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Outlander is 0.8 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): | no data | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Volvo XC60 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mitsubishi Outlander, so Volvo XC60 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 16 600 | 27 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Outlander has
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |