Toyota Celica 2002 vs Mitsubishi 3000 GT 1992
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Toyota Celica is available with front wheel drive, while Mitsubishi 3000 GT can be equipped with four wheel (4x4) drive. | |||
| Engines: | 1.8 | 3.0 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 143 - 192 HP | 286 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 - 180 NM | 407 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.4 - 8.7 seconds | 5.9 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 - 8.4 | 11.1 - 12.4 | |
|
Toyota Celica petrol engines consumes on average 3.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than Mitsubishi 3000 GT. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.35 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.32 m | 1.28 m | |
|
Toyota Celica is smaller, but slightly higher. Toyota Celica is 22 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi 3000 GT, 10 cm narrower, while the height of Toyota Celica is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota Celica is 1 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi 3000 GT, which means Toyota Celica can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`200 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2600 | 25 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Celica has
|
Mitsubishi 3000 GT has
| |