1996 Land Rover Range Rover vs. 2002 Mitsubishi eK
To start off, 2002 Mitsubishi eK is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Land Rover Range Rover. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Land Rover Range Rover would be higher. At 3,946 cc (8 cylinders), 1996 Land Rover Range Rover is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Land Rover Range Rover weights approximately 1300 kg more than 2002 Mitsubishi eK.
Because 1996 Land Rover Range Rover is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2002 Mitsubishi eK. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Land Rover Range Rover will offer significantly more control. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. 2002 Mitsubishi eK has automatic transmission and 1996 Land Rover Range Rover has manual transmission. 1996 Land Rover Range Rover will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2002 Mitsubishi eK will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1996 Land Rover Range Rover | 2002 Mitsubishi eK | |
| Make | Land Rover | Mitsubishi |
| Model | Range Rover | eK |
| Year Released | 1996 | 2002 |
| Body Type | SUV | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3946 cc | 657 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 188 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 2090 kg | 790 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4720 mm | 3400 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1480 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1820 mm | 1560 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2350 mm |
