Toyota Urban Cruiser 2008 vs Mitsubishi ASX 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 100 HP | 117 HP | |
| Torque: | 132 NM | 154 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | 11.4 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi ASX is a more dynamic driving. Toyota Urban Cruiser engine produces 17 HP less power than Mitsubishi ASX, whereas torque is 22 NM less than Mitsubishi ASX. Due to the lower power, Toyota Urban Cruiser reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 | 6.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.4 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Urban Cruiser is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Toyota Urban Cruiser consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi ASX, which means that by driving the Toyota Urban Cruiser over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Toyota Urban Cruiser consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi ASX. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 42 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 1050 km in combined cycle | |
| 630 km on highway | 1260 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 910 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi ASX gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mitsubishi ASX engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 17 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Toyota Corolla, Toyota Auris, Toyota Yaris, Toyota Verso, Toyota iQ | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota Urban Cruiser might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Toyota Urban Cruiser 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. | |||
| Toyota Urban Cruiser 2008 1.3 engine: The engine is known for its reliability but exhibits several common issues, especially as mileage increases. Owners report minor oil consumption, which tends to grow over time due to piston ring coking. Individual ignition ... More about Toyota Urban Cruiser 2008 1.3 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.93 m | 4.30 m | |
| Width: | 1.73 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.53 m | 1.62 m | |
|
Toyota Urban Cruiser is smaller. Toyota Urban Cruiser is 37 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi ASX, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Toyota Urban Cruiser is 9 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 314 litres | 419 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1219 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi ASX has more luggage space. Toyota Urban Cruiser has 105 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi ASX. | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`590 | 1`870 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mitsubishi ASX scores higher in safety tests. The Toyota Urban Cruiser scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | 5200 | 6000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Urban Cruiser has
|
Mitsubishi ASX has
| |