Renault Kangoo 2003 vs Mitsubishi Space Star 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.1 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 86 HP | |
| Torque: | 105 NM | 117 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.2 seconds | 13.4 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Space Star is a more dynamic driving. Renault Kangoo engine produces 11 HP less power than Mitsubishi Space Star, whereas torque is 12 NM less than Mitsubishi Space Star. Due to the lower power, Renault Kangoo reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.0 | 6.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.0 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Kangoo is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Renault Kangoo consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Space Star, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Kangoo could require 30 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Renault Kangoo consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Space Star. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 840 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Space Star gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 17 years | 27 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Renault Clio, Dacia Logan, Renault Twingo, Dacia Sandero | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi Carisma, Mitsubishi Colt | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.00 m | 4.03 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.83 m | 1.52 m | |
|
Renault Kangoo is smaller, but higher. Renault Kangoo is 3 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Space Star, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Kangoo is 31 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 650 litres | 370 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2600 litres | 1370 litres | |
|
Renault Kangoo has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Renault Kangoo has 280 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Space Star. The Mitsubishi Space Star may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Kangoo (by 1230 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 9.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Kangoo is 1.2 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Space Star, which means Renault Kangoo can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`570 | 1`655 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Kangoo has
|
Mitsubishi Space Star has
| |