Mitsubishi Space Runner 1999 vs Nissan Almera Tino 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Mitsubishi Space Runner) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Nissan Almera Tino) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Double-row 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: | 136 HP | 114 HP | |
| Torque: | 178 NM | 230 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 12.5 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Space Runner is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Space Runner engine produces 22 HP more power than Nissan Almera Tino, but torque is 52 NM less than Nissan Almera Tino. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Space Runner reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.2 | 6.4 | |
|
The Nissan Almera Tino is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mitsubishi Space Runner consumes 2.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Almera Tino, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Space Runner could require 420 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 930 km in combined cycle | |
| 840 km on highway | 1130 km on highway | ||
| Nissan Almera Tino 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 | 390'000 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: | 46 years | 3 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi Outlander, Mitsubishi Space Wagon | Used also on Nissan Almera | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mitsubishi Space Runner 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: | 4.29 m | 4.26 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.65 m | 1.61 m | |
| Mitsubishi Space Runner is 3 cm longer than the Nissan Almera Tino, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Space Runner is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 440 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1800 litres | 1950 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| Gross weight: | 1`880 kg | 1`940 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`300 kg | 1`480 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 580 kg | 460 kg | |
| Mitsubishi Space Runner load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 21 procentiem more than Nissan Almera Tino. Therefore, Mitsubishi Space Runner is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 600 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Space Runner has
|
Nissan Almera Tino has
| |