Mitsubishi Space Runner 1999 vs Nissan Serena 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | 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 | 145 HP | |
| Torque: | 178 NM | 186 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 15 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Space Runner engine produces 9 HP less power than Nissan Serena, whereas torque is 8 NM less than Nissan Serena. Despite less power, Mitsubishi Space Runner reaches 100 km/h speed 4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.2 | 8.3 | |
|
The Nissan Serena is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mitsubishi Space Runner consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Serena, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Space Runner could require 135 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| Nissan Serena gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 520'000 km | 280'000 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 | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi Outlander, Mitsubishi Space Wagon | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Nissan Primera, Nissan Sentra | |
| 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 | 4.52 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.65 m | 1.83 m | |
| Mitsubishi Space Runner is 23 cm shorter than the Nissan Serena, width is practically the same , while the height of Mitsubishi Space Runner is 18 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 520 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1800 litres | no data | |
|
Nissan Serena has more luggage space. Mitsubishi Space Runner has 90 litres less trunk space than the Nissan Serena. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Space Runner is 0.6 metres less than that of the Nissan Serena, which means Mitsubishi Space Runner can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`880 | 2`060 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 600 | 1400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Space Runner has
|
Nissan Serena has
| |