Mitsubishi Space Star 2016 vs Citroen C1 2014
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
| 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: | 80 HP | 82 HP | |
| Torque: | 106 NM | 116 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.8 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Citroen C1 is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Space Star engine produces 2 HP less power than Citroen C1, whereas torque is 10 NM less than Citroen C1. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Space Star reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.1 | 4.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.4 l/100km | 5.7 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Space Star is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Space Star consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C1, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Space Star over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Space Star consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C1. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 35 litres | 35 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 850 km in combined cycle | 810 km in combined cycle | |
| 920 km on highway | 940 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Ground clearance: | 150 mm (5.9 inches) | 120 mm (4.7 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mitsubishi Space Star 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. Note, however, that this Mitsubishi Space Star version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 320'000 km | 370'000 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 Citroen C1 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Peugeot 308, Citroen C3, Peugeot 2008, Opel Crossland | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Citroen C1 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.80 m | 3.44 m | |
| Width: | 1.67 m | 1.63 m | |
| Height: | 1.51 m | 1.47 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Space Star is larger. Mitsubishi Space Star is 36 cm longer than the Citroen C1, 4 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Space Star is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 235 litres | 196 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
912 litres | 780 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi Space Star has more luggage capacity. Mitsubishi Space Star has 39 litres more trunk space than the Citroen C1. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Space Star (by 132 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Space Star is 0.8 metres less than that of the Citroen C1, which means Mitsubishi Space Star can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`370 | 1`240 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 6800 | 6200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Space Star has
|
Citroen C1 has
| |