Land Rover Freelander 2000 vs Mitsubishi Outlander 2003
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 112 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 260 NM | 176 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15.3 seconds | 11.4 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Outlander is a more dynamic driving. Land Rover Freelander engine produces 24 HP less power than Mitsubishi Outlander, but torque is 84 NM more than Mitsubishi Outlander. Due to the lower power, Land Rover Freelander reaches 100 km/h speed 3.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.6 | 9.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 9.7 l/100km | |
|
The Land Rover Freelander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Land Rover Freelander consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means that by driving the Land Rover Freelander over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Land Rover Freelander consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 59 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 620 km in combined cycle | |
| 830 km on highway | 770 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 600 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) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 520'000 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 Outlander engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 45 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi Space Wagon | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.38 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.76 m | 1.62 m | |
| Land Rover Freelander is 16 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Outlander, 5 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Freelander is 14 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 402 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1705 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Freelander is 0.2 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Outlander. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | 1`995 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 1800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 5.8/10 | 8.5/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Freelander has
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has
| |