Jeep Cherokee 2013 vs Mitsubishi Outlander 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.2 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 271 HP | 147 HP | |
| Torque: | 315 NM | 195 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.1 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Jeep Cherokee is more dynamic to drive. Jeep Cherokee engine produces 124 HP more power than Mitsubishi Outlander, whereas torque is 120 NM more than Mitsubishi Outlander. Thanks to more power Jeep Cherokee reaches 100 km/h speed 3.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.0 | 7.5 | |
|
The Mitsubishi Outlander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Jeep Cherokee consumes 2.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jeep Cherokee could require 375 litres more fuel. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 20 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi ASX, Peugeot 4008 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Outlander might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Jeep Cherokee 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: | 4.62 m | 4.66 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.67 m | 1.68 m | |
| Jeep Cherokee is 3 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Outlander, 6 cm wider, while the height of Jeep Cherokee is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 412 litres | 591 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has more luggage space. Jeep Cherokee has 179 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Outlander. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Cherokee is 1 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means Jeep Cherokee can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`435 kg | 1`985 kg | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mitsubishi Outlander is better rated in child safety tests. The Mitsubishi Outlander scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 11 800 | 8200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Cherokee has
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has
| |