Mitsubishi Space Runner 1991 vs Renault Espace 1997
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 120 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 162 NM | 168 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 13.7 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Space Runner is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Space Runner engine produces 5 HP more power than Renault Espace, but torque is 6 NM less than Renault Espace. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Space Runner reaches 100 km/h speed 3.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.8 | 9.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.8 l/100km | 10.1 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Space Runner is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Space Runner consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Espace, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Space Runner over 15,000 km in a year you can save 135 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Space Runner consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Espace. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 78 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 840 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Espace gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 23 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mitsubishi Space Wagon | Used only for this car | |
| 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: | 4.27 m | 4.52 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.66 m | 1.77 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Space Runner is smaller. Mitsubishi Space Runner is 25 cm shorter than the Renault Espace, 11 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Space Runner is 11 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 5 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 676 litres | 275 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 275 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 676 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1498 litres | 2850 litres | |
| The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Espace (by 1352 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Space Runner is 1.2 metres less than that of the Renault Espace, which means Mitsubishi Space Runner can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`250 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 600 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Space Runner has
|
Renault Espace has
| |