Mitsubishi Outlander 2018 vs Volvo XC60 2013
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Hybrid | 2.4 Diesel | |
| Hybrid engines (Mitsubishi Outlander) excel in urban environments with superior fuel efficiency and lower emissions during stop-and-go driving. Diesel engines (Volvo XC60), however, are more fuel-efficient on long highway trips and provide greater torque for towing and heavy loads. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 135 HP | 181 HP | |
| Torque: | 211 NM | 420 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC60 is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Outlander engine produces 46 HP less power than Volvo XC60, whereas torque is 209 NM less than Volvo XC60. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Outlander reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 1.8 | 6.4 | |
|
The Mitsubishi Outlander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mitsubishi Outlander consumes 4.6 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 690 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 2500 km in combined cycle | 1090 km in combined cycle | |
| 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) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 190 mm (7.5 inches) | 230 mm (9.1 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.70 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.71 m | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander is 5 cm longer than the Volvo XC60, 9 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 463 litres | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1602 litres | 1455 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Mitsubishi Outlander has 32 litres less trunk space than the Volvo XC60. This could mean that the Mitsubishi Outlander uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Outlander (by 147 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Outlander is 1.1 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`390 | 2`270 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 19 600 | 13 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Outlander has
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |