Suzuki Baleno 1995 vs Mitsubishi Galant 1996
| Body: | Estate car / wagon | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The wagon generally has more cargo space due to a larger trunk door opening, a roof that extends as far back as possible, and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into cargo space. Sedans tend to be quieter than wagons due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 96 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 134 NM | 179 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.2 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Galant is a more dynamic driving. Suzuki Baleno engine produces 54 HP less power than Mitsubishi Galant, whereas torque is 45 NM less than Mitsubishi Galant. Due to the lower power, Suzuki Baleno reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.5 | 8.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 9.2 l/100km | |
|
The Suzuki Baleno is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Suzuki Baleno consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Galant, which means that by driving the Suzuki Baleno over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Suzuki Baleno consumes 1.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Galant. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 820 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Galant 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: | 15 years | 23 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Suzuki Grand Vitara, Suzuki Vitara | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volvo V40, Volvo S40, Mitsubishi Carisma | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Galant might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mitsubishi Galant 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: | 4.38 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Suzuki Baleno is smaller, but slightly higher. Suzuki Baleno is 25 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Galant, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Suzuki Baleno is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 375 litres | 470 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1400 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi Galant has more luggage space. Suzuki Baleno has 95 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Galant. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki Baleno is 1 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Galant, which means Suzuki Baleno can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`200 kg | 1`850 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Suzuki Baleno has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Galant has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Suzuki Baleno, so Suzuki Baleno quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 1800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.0/10 | 5.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki Baleno has
|
Mitsubishi Galant has
| |