Mitsubishi Space Wagon 1992 vs Mitsubishi Space Runner 1991
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 133 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 176 NM | 162 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.2 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Space Wagon engine produces 13 HP more power than Mitsubishi Space Runner, whereas torque is 14 NM more than Mitsubishi Space Runner. Despite the higher power, Mitsubishi Space Wagon reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.8 | 8.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.7 l/100km | 8.8 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Space Runner is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Space Wagon consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Space Runner, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Space Wagon could require 150 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Space Wagon consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Space Runner. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 610 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 770 km on highway | 840 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Space Runner 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 | 480'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 45 years | 23 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi Outlander | Used also on Mitsubishi Space Wagon | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Space Wagon might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.50 m | 4.27 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.58 m | 1.66 m | |
| Mitsubishi Space Wagon is 23 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Space Runner, width is practically the same , while the height of Mitsubishi Space Wagon is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | 5 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 212 litres | 676 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 212 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | no data | 676 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1714 litres | 1498 litres | |
| The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Space Wagon (by 216 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Space Wagon is 0.8 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Space Runner, which means Mitsubishi Space Wagon can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`980 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.5/10 | 6.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Space Wagon has
|
Mitsubishi Space Runner has
| |