Volvo XC60 2008 vs Mitsubishi Outlander 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Diesel | 2.3 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 177 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Outlander is a more dynamic driving. Volvo XC60 engine produces 14 HP less power than Mitsubishi Outlander, whereas torque is 40 NM less than Mitsubishi Outlander. Due to the lower power, Volvo XC60 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.3 | 6.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Outlander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo XC60 consumes 2.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo XC60 could require 315 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo XC60 consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 960 km in combined cycle | |
| 1020 km on highway | 1130 km on highway | ||
| 810 km with real consumption | 750 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: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 230 mm (9.1 inches) | 215 mm (8.5 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Volvo XC60 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.63 m | 4.67 m | |
| Width: | 1.89 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.68 m | |
| Volvo XC60 is 4 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Outlander, 9 cm wider, while the height of Volvo XC60 is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 495 litres | 774 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1455 litres | 1691 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has more luggage space. Volvo XC60 has 279 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Outlander. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Outlander (by 236 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo XC60 is 1.3 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means Volvo XC60 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`505 | 2`170 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Volvo XC60 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Outlander has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than Volvo XC60, so Volvo XC60 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8200 | 4400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC60 has
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has
| |