Mitsubishi Space Star 1998 vs Mitsubishi Space Wagon 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 2.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 86 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 117 NM | 225 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.4 seconds | 10.7 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Space Wagon is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Space Star engine produces 64 HP less power than Mitsubishi Space Wagon, whereas torque is 108 NM less than Mitsubishi Space Wagon. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Space Star reaches 100 km/h speed 2.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.8 | 9.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.5 l/100km | 9.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Space Star is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Space Star consumes 2.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Space Wagon, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Space Star over 15,000 km in a year you can save 375 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Space Star consumes 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Space Wagon. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 670 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 820 km on highway | ||
| 730 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Space Star gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 460'000 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 Space Wagon engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 27 years | 40 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi Carisma, Mitsubishi Colt | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Galant, Mitsubishi Space Runner | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Space Wagon might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mitsubishi Space Wagon engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.03 m | 4.60 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.65 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Space Star is smaller. Mitsubishi Space Star is 57 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Space Wagon, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Space Star is 13 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 5 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 370 litres | 240 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 240 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 370 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1370 litres | 240 litres | |
| The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Space Star (by 1130 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.6 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Space Star is 1.4 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Space Wagon, which means Mitsubishi Space Star can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`655 | 2`180 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Space Star has
|
Mitsubishi Space Wagon has
| |