Mitsubishi Carisma 2001 vs Toyota Corolla 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 102 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 215 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
|
Toyota Corolla is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Carisma engine produces 8 HP less power than Toyota Corolla, whereas torque is 35 NM less than Toyota Corolla. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Carisma reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 | 5.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.0 l/100km | 6.3 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Carisma is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Carisma consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Corolla, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Carisma over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Carisma consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Corolla. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1090 km in combined cycle | 960 km in combined cycle | |
| 1330 km on highway | 1170 km on highway | ||
| 1000 km with real consumption | 870 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Carisma gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 280'000 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 Carisma engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volvo V40, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, 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. Mitsubishi Carisma might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Mitsubishi Carisma 2001 1.9 engine: Long-lasting and fuel-efficient engine. Maintaining oil change and maintenance intervals is essential for a long engine life, as poor or untimely oil changes can result in turbine and oil pump damage, followed ... More about Mitsubishi Carisma 2001 1.9 engine 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 |
1050 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Carisma is 0.2 metres more than that of the Toyota Corolla. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`795 kg | 1`300 kg | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Toyota Corolla has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Carisma has serious deffects in 40 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
| |