Land Rover Freelander 2000 vs Mitsubishi Pajero 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 3.5 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 117 HP | 202 HP | |
| Torque: | 160 NM | 318 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.6 seconds | 11.7 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Pajero is a more dynamic driving. Land Rover Freelander engine produces 85 HP less power than Mitsubishi Pajero, whereas torque is 158 NM less than Mitsubishi Pajero. Due to the lower power, Land Rover Freelander reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.4 | 14.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.5 l/100km | 15.7 l/100km | |
|
The Land Rover Freelander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Land Rover Freelander consumes 3.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Pajero, which means that by driving the Land Rover Freelander over 15,000 km in a year you can save 570 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Land Rover Freelander consumes 5.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Pajero. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 71 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 560 km in combined cycle | 500 km in combined cycle | |
| 690 km on highway | 630 km on highway | ||
| 560 km with real consumption | 450 km with real consumption | ||
| Land Rover Freelander gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.38 m | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.76 m | 1.84 m | |
| Land Rover Freelander is 10 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Pajero, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Land Rover Freelander is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Freelander is 1 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Pajero, which means Land Rover Freelander can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | 2`800 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Mitsubishi Pajero has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Land Rover Freelander has serious deffects in 60 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Pajero, so Mitsubishi Pajero quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 4000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Freelander has
|
Mitsubishi Pajero has
| |