Subaru Forester 2002 vs Mitsubishi Outlander 2003
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 177 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 245 NM | 176 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.7 seconds | 10.7 seconds | |
|
Subaru Forester is more dynamic to drive. Subaru Forester engine produces 41 HP more power than Mitsubishi Outlander, whereas torque is 69 NM more than Mitsubishi Outlander. Thanks to more power Subaru Forester reaches 100 km/h speed 2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.8 | 9.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.8 l/100km | 9.7 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Outlander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Subaru Forester consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Subaru Forester could require 105 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Subaru Forester consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 59 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 610 km in combined cycle | 640 km in combined cycle | |
| 780 km on highway | 790 km on highway | ||
| 550 km with real consumption | 600 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 320'000 km | 520'000 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 Outlander engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 46 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, 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 Outlander might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mitsubishi Outlander 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: | 4.45 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.58 m | 1.62 m | |
|
Subaru Forester is smaller. Subaru Forester is 9 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Outlander, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Subaru Forester is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 406 litres | 402 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1525 litres | 1705 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Subaru Forester is 0.8 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means Subaru Forester can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`800 kg | 2`000 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 1800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Subaru Forester has
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has
| |