Mitsubishi Pajero 1994 vs Land Rover Range Rover 1995
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.8 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 292 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 17.3 seconds | 17.5 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Pajero is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Pajero engine produces 11 HP less power than Land Rover Range Rover, but torque is 22 NM more than Land Rover Range Rover. Despite less power, Mitsubishi Pajero reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 12.4 | 11.4 | |
|
The Land Rover Range Rover is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mitsubishi Pajero consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Pajero could require 150 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 92 litres | 90 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 940 km on highway | 930 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 | 420'000 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 | 8 years | |
| 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: | 1.88 m | 1.82 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Pajero is smaller, but higher. Mitsubishi Pajero is 1 cm shorter than the Land Rover Range Rover, 19 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Pajero is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 1080 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2050 litres | 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 (€): | 4400 | 4000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Pajero has
|
Land Rover Range Rover has
| |