Mitsubishi Pajero 2001 vs Land Rover Freelander 2003
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 165 HP | 112 HP | |
| Torque: | 373 NM | 260 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.3 seconds | 14.4 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Pajero is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Pajero engine produces 53 HP more power than Land Rover Freelander, whereas torque is 113 NM more than Land Rover Freelander. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Pajero reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.5 | 7.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.0 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Land Rover Freelander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Pajero consumes 2.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Freelander, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Pajero could require 435 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Pajero consumes 1.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Freelander. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 90 litres | 59 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 850 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 1030 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 900 km with real consumption | 720 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) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.28 m | 4.45 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.84 m | 1.71 m | |
| Mitsubishi Pajero is 17 cm shorter than the Land Rover Freelander, 7 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Pajero is 13 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Pajero is 1 metres less than that of the Land Rover Freelander, which means Mitsubishi Pajero can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`800 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | average | |
| Mitsubishi Pajero has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Land Rover Freelander has serious deffects in 60 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Pajero, so Mitsubishi Pajero quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3800 | 3200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Pajero has
|
Land Rover Freelander has
| |