Mitsubishi Pajero 1991 vs Land Rover Range Rover 1995
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.5 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: | 99 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 25.1 seconds | 17.5 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Pajero engine produces 37 HP less power than Land Rover Range Rover, whereas torque is 30 NM less than Land Rover Range Rover. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Pajero reaches 100 km/h speed 7.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.0 | 11.4 | |
| Mitsubishi Pajero consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Pajero over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 90 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| Land Rover Range Rover gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 30 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mitsubishi L 200 | 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 Pajero might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Land Rover Range Rover 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: | 4.70 m | 4.71 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.86 m | 1.82 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Pajero is smaller, but slightly higher. Mitsubishi Pajero is 1 cm shorter than the Land Rover Range Rover, 19 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Pajero is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Pajero is 0.1 metres less than that of the Land Rover Range Rover. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`300 | 3`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 3600 | 3400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Pajero has
|
Land Rover Range Rover has
| |