Mitsubishi Space Runner 1999 vs Mitsubishi Space Star 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 HP | 122 HP | |
| Torque: | 178 NM | 174 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Space Runner engine produces 14 HP more power than Mitsubishi Space Star, whereas torque is 4 NM more than Mitsubishi Space Star. Despite the higher power, Mitsubishi Space Runner reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.2 | 7.0 | |
|
The Mitsubishi Space Star is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mitsubishi Space Runner consumes 2.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Space Star, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Space Runner could require 330 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 840 km on highway | 930 km on highway | ||
| Mitsubishi Space Star gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 520'000 km | 350'000 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 Space Runner engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 45 years | 23 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi Outlander, Mitsubishi Space Wagon | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volvo V40, Volvo S40, Mitsubishi Carisma, Mitsubishi Galant | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Space Runner might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.29 m | 4.03 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.65 m | 1.52 m | |
| Mitsubishi Space Runner is 26 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Space Star, width is practically the same , while the height of Mitsubishi Space Runner is 13 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 370 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1800 litres | 1370 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi Space Runner has more luggage capacity. Mitsubishi Space Runner has 60 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Space Star. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Space Runner (by 430 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 9.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Space Runner is 0.8 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Space Star, which means Mitsubishi Space Runner can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`880 | 1`730 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 600 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Space Runner has
|
Mitsubishi Space Star has
| |