Volvo XC60 2013 vs Mitsubishi Outlander 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Diesel | 2.3 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 215 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 440 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.3 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC60 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo XC60 engine produces 65 HP more power than Mitsubishi Outlander, whereas torque is 60 NM more than Mitsubishi Outlander. Thanks to more power Volvo XC60 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 5.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.2 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 1.1 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 | ||
| 850 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) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 460'000 km | 480'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Volvo XC70 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mitsubishi L 200, Mitsubishi ASX | |
| 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: | yes | no | |
| The Volvo XC60 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: | 4.64 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, if possible |
1455 litres | 986 litres | |
|
Volvo XC60 has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, 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: | 2`270 kg | 2`170 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`834 kg | 1`590 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 436 kg | 580 kg | |
| Volvo XC60 load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 33 procentiem less than Mitsubishi Outlander. Therefore, Mitsubishi Outlander is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| 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 (€): | 12 600 | 8200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC60 has
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has
| |