Subaru Forester 1997 vs Mitsubishi L 200 1996
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Subaru Forester) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Mitsubishi L 200) 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 | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 184 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.4 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Subaru Forester engine produces 25 HP more power than Mitsubishi L 200, but torque is 56 NM less than Mitsubishi L 200. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.0 | no data | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 75 litres | |
| 610 km with real consumption | 720 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) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 30 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Subaru Impreza, Subaru Legacy | Used also on Mitsubishi Pajero | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.45 m | 4.50 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.60 m | 1.57 m | |
| Subaru Forester is 5 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi L 200, 9 cm wider, while the height of Subaru Forester is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 406 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1525 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight: | 1`875 kg | 2`835 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`440 kg | 1`730 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 435 kg | 1`105 kg | |
| Subaru Forester load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is more than two times less than Mitsubishi L 200. Therefore, Mitsubishi L 200 is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 4400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Subaru Forester has
|
Mitsubishi L 200 has
| |