Toyota Picnic 1996 vs Mitsubishi Space Wagon 2000
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 128 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 178 NM | 178 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 12 seconds | |
| Toyota Picnic engine produces 8 HP less power than Mitsubishi Space Wagon, the torque is the same for both cars. Despite less power, Toyota Picnic reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.5 | 9.2 | |
| Toyota Picnic consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Space Wagon, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Toyota Picnic could require 45 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 630 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 780 km on highway | 840 km on highway | ||
| Mitsubishi Space Wagon gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 17 years | 45 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Carina E, Toyota Hiace | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi Outlander | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Space Wagon might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mitsubishi Space Wagon 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: | 4.53 m | 4.60 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.62 m | 1.65 m | |
|
Toyota Picnic is smaller. Toyota Picnic is 7 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Space Wagon, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Toyota Picnic is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 6 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 180 litres | 240 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 240 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 180 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1840 litres | 1930 litres | |
| The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Space Wagon (by 90 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | 2`120 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Toyota Picnic has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Space Wagon has serious deffects in 80 percent more cases than Toyota Picnic, so Toyota Picnic quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2200 | 800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.8/10 | 7.5/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Picnic has
|
Mitsubishi Space Wagon has
| |