Mitsubishi Pajero 1994 vs Land Rover Defender 1996
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.8 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 113 HP | |
| Torque: | 292 NM | 265 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 17.3 seconds | 18.6 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Pajero is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Pajero engine produces 12 HP more power than Land Rover Defender, whereas torque is 27 NM more than Land Rover Defender. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Pajero reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 12.4 | 10.1 | |
|
The Land Rover Defender is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mitsubishi Pajero consumes 2.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Defender, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Pajero could require 345 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 92 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 790 km in combined cycle | |
| 940 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 520'000 km | 440'000 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 Pajero engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Land Rover Range Rover, Land Rover Discovery | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Land Rover Defender might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.70 m | 4.60 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.88 m | 2.04 m | |
| Mitsubishi Pajero is 10 cm longer than the Land Rover Defender, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Pajero is 16 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 1080 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2050 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 12.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Pajero is 1 metres less than that of the Land Rover Defender, which means Mitsubishi Pajero can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`300 | 3`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 4000 | 6600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Pajero has
|
Land Rover Defender has
| |