Mitsubishi Carisma 1996 vs Toyota Corolla 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 176 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.2 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
|
Toyota Corolla is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Carisma engine produces 20 HP less power than Toyota Corolla, whereas torque is 74 NM less than Toyota Corolla. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Carisma reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 5.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.9 l/100km | 6.3 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Carisma is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Mitsubishi Carisma consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Corolla, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Carisma could require 45 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mitsubishi Carisma consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Corolla. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 960 km in combined cycle | |
| 1250 km on highway | 1170 km on highway | ||
| 1010 km with real consumption | 870 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 18 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volvo V40, Volvo S40 | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota RAV4, Toyota Corolla Verso | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Toyota Corolla 2002 2.0 engine: The engine was known for its solid technical characteristics.
One of its drawbacks is the lack of hydraulic lifters, requiring periodic valve clearance adjustments. The next-generation 1AD-FTV engine was equipped with ... More about Toyota Corolla 2002 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.18 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.48 m | |
| Mitsubishi Carisma is 30 cm longer than the Toyota Corolla, width is practically the same , while the height of Mitsubishi Carisma is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
660 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.2 meters | |
| Gross weight: | 1`675 kg | 1`300 kg | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Toyota Corolla has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Carisma has serious deffects in 245 percent more cases than Toyota Corolla, so Toyota Corolla quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.9/10 | 8.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Carisma has
|
Toyota Corolla has
| |