Mitsubishi Pajero 2000 vs Volvo XC90 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.2 Diesel | 2.4 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 165 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 373 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.8 seconds | 12 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Pajero engine produces 2 HP more power than Volvo XC90, whereas torque is 33 NM more than Volvo XC90. Despite the higher power, Mitsubishi Pajero reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.5 | 9.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.4 l/100km | 9.3 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo XC90 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Pajero consumes 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Pajero could require 210 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Pajero consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 90 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 850 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 1030 km on highway | 930 km on highway | ||
| 860 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Pajero gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Volvo XC90 2002 2.4 engine: These diesel engines are frequently affected by intake manifold swirl flap seizures. This issue often leads to airflow disruptions and rough engine operation.
The actuator for the turbocharger, which relies ... More about Volvo XC90 2002 2.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.80 m | 4.80 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.86 m | 1.74 m | |
| Mitsubishi Pajero and Volvo XC90 are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 249 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 2404 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 12.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Pajero is 1.3 metres less than that of the Volvo XC90, which means Mitsubishi Pajero can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`300 | 2`735 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | low | |
| Average price (€): | 3200 | 4200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Pajero has
|
Volvo XC90 has
| |