Mitsubishi Carisma 2001 vs Opel Astra 1998
| 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: | 115 HP | 82 HP | |
| Torque: | 265 NM | 185 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 14.5 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Carisma is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Carisma engine produces 33 HP more power than Opel Astra, whereas torque is 80 NM more than Opel Astra. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Carisma reaches 100 km/h speed 4.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.0 l/100km | 6.2 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Carisma is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Carisma consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Astra, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Carisma over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, 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: | 1110 km in combined cycle | 890 km in combined cycle | |
| 1360 km on highway | 1080 km on highway | ||
| 1000 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Carisma gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volvo V40, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Volvo S40 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Opel Zafira, Opel Vectra | |
| 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: | 4.48 m | 4.11 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.42 m | |
| Mitsubishi Carisma is 37 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 |
no data | 1180 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi Carisma has more luggage capacity. Mitsubishi Carisma has 90 litres more trunk space than the Opel Astra. | |||
| 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`775 | 1`745 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Mitsubishi Carisma has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Opel Astra has serious deffects in 130 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Carisma, so Mitsubishi Carisma quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.9/10 | 7.5/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Carisma has
|
Opel Astra has
| |