Toyota C-HR 2016 vs Mitsubishi ASX 2016
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 116 HP | 117 HP | |
| Torque: | 185 NM | 154 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.1 seconds | 11.4 seconds | |
|
Toyota C-HR is more dynamic to drive. Toyota C-HR engine produces 1 HP less power than Mitsubishi ASX, but torque is 31 NM more than Mitsubishi ASX. Despite less power, Toyota C-HR reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 6.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
By specification Toyota C-HR consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi ASX, which means that by driving the Toyota C-HR over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Toyota C-HR consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi ASX. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 1030 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 1260 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 880 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 280'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 16 years | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi ASX might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Toyota C-HR 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. | |||
| Mitsubishi ASX 2016 1.6 engine: The Mitsubishi 4A92 is a 1.6-liter inline four-cylinder engine with a timing chain, known primarily for its low fuel consumption and relatively simple construction. It is widely used in models such as the Lancer and ASX. While the engine is fairly economical and inexpensive to maintain, it also has ... More about Mitsubishi ASX 2016 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.36 m | 4.30 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.56 m | 1.63 m | |
|
Toyota C-HR is larger, but lower. Toyota C-HR is 7 cm longer than the Mitsubishi ASX, 3 cm wider, while the height of Toyota C-HR is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 377 litres | 384 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1219 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota C-HR is 0.4 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi ASX, which means Toyota C-HR can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`865 kg | 1`870 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`390 kg | 1`260 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 475 kg | 610 kg | |
| Toyota C-HR load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 28 procentiem less than Mitsubishi ASX. Therefore, Mitsubishi ASX is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | 18 000 | 10 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Mitsubishi ASX has
| |