Renault Captur 2012 vs Mitsubishi ASX 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 120 HP | 117 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 154 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 11.4 seconds | |
|
Renault Captur is more dynamic to drive. Renault Captur engine produces 3 HP more power than Mitsubishi ASX, whereas torque is 36 NM more than Mitsubishi ASX. Thanks to more power Renault Captur reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi ASX is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Renault Captur consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi ASX, which means that by driving the Renault Captur over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Renault Captur consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi ASX. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 1080 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 1280 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 910 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi ASX gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 170 mm (6.7 inches) | 190 mm (7.5 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mitsubishi ASX 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 ASX version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. Choose from seven 4x4 versions of Mitsubishi ASX 2012 if off-road driveability is important to you. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Renault Scenic, Renault Megane, Dacia Duster, Dacia Dokker | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.12 m | 4.30 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.57 m | 1.62 m | |
| Renault Captur is 17 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi ASX, width is practically the same , while the height of Renault Captur is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 377 litres | 442 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1235 litres | 1219 litres | |
| Renault Captur has 65 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi ASX. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Captur (by 16 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Captur is 0.2 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi ASX. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`726 | 1`870 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Mitsubishi ASX has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Captur has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Mitsubishi ASX, so Mitsubishi ASX quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7400 | 10 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Captur has
|
Mitsubishi ASX has
| |