Mitsubishi Carisma 1996 vs Opel Astra 1999
| Body: | Sedan | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 101 HP | |
| Torque: | 176 NM | 230 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.2 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Opel Astra is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Carisma engine produces 11 HP less power than Opel Astra, whereas torque is 54 NM less than Opel Astra. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Carisma reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 5.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.9 l/100km | 6.1 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mitsubishi Carisma consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Opel Astra, 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 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Astra. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 52 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 910 km in combined cycle | |
| 1250 km on highway | 1130 km on highway | ||
| 1010 km with real consumption | 850 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Carisma gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 18 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volvo V40, Volvo S40 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Opel Zafira, Opel Signum | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Carisma might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Opel Astra 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: | 4.45 m | 4.11 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.42 m | |
| Mitsubishi Carisma is 34 cm longer than the Opel Astra, width is practically the same , while the height of Mitsubishi Carisma is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 460 litres | 370 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
430 litres | 1180 litres | |
| Mitsubishi Carisma has 90 litres more trunk space than the Opel Astra. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Opel Astra (by 750 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Carisma is 0.3 metres more than that of the Opel Astra. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`675 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Mitsubishi Carisma has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Opel Astra, so Mitsubishi Carisma quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.9/10 | 7.5/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Carisma has
|
Opel Astra has
| |