Mitsubishi Carisma 1997 vs Audi A4 1995
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 101 HP | |
| Torque: | 174 NM | 140 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 11.9 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Carisma is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Carisma engine produces 24 HP more power than Audi A4, whereas torque is 34 NM more than Audi A4. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Carisma reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 8.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Carisma is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Carisma consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Audi A4, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Carisma over 15,000 km in a year you can save 195 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Carisma consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Audi A4. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 890 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 1110 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 810 km with real consumption | 760 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: | 350'000 km | 480'000 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 Audi A4 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 23 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volvo V40, Volvo S40, Mitsubishi Galant | Used only for this car | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.73 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.42 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mitsubishi Carisma and Audi A4 are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 460 litres | 440 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
430 litres | no data | |
| Mitsubishi Carisma has 20 litres more trunk space than the Audi A4. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Carisma is 0.7 metres less than that of the Audi A4, which means Mitsubishi Carisma can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`685 | 1`745 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Mitsubishi Carisma has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Audi A4 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Carisma, so Mitsubishi Carisma quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.9/10 | 7.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Carisma has
|
Audi A4 has
| |