Volvo XC60 2013 vs Mitsubishi Outlander 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Diesel | 2.3 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 181 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 420 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
| Volvo XC60 engine produces 31 HP more power than Mitsubishi Outlander, whereas torque is 40 NM more than Mitsubishi Outlander. Despite the higher power, Volvo XC60 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 5.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Outlander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo XC60 consumes 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 150 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo XC60 consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1090 km in combined cycle | 1110 km in combined cycle | |
| 1320 km on highway | 1270 km on highway | ||
| 950 km with real consumption | 840 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) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.64 m | 4.66 m | |
| Width: | 1.89 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.68 m | |
| Volvo XC60 is 1 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Outlander, 9 cm wider, while the height of Volvo XC60 is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 495 litres | 220 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1455 litres | 986 litres | |
|
Volvo XC60 has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Volvo XC60 has 275 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Outlander. The Mitsubishi Outlander may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo XC60 (by 469 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.7 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo XC60 is 1.1 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`270 | 2`170 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | below average | |
| Volvo XC60 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Outlander has serious deffects in 80 percent more cases than Volvo XC60, so Volvo XC60 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 13 200 | 8400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC60 has
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has
| |