1996 Mitsubishi Pajero vs. 2010 Ford C-Max
To start off, 2010 Ford C-Max is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Mitsubishi Pajero. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Mitsubishi Pajero would be higher. At 1,560 cc (4 cylinders), 2010 Ford C-Max is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Ford C-Max weights approximately 525 kg more than 1996 Mitsubishi Pajero.
Because 1996 Mitsubishi Pajero is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2010 Ford C-Max. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Mitsubishi Pajero 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1996 Mitsubishi Pajero | 2010 Ford C-Max | |
| Make | Mitsubishi | Ford |
| Model | Pajero | C-Max |
| Year Released | 1996 | 2010 |
| Body Type | SUV | Minivan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 700 cc | 1560 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 95 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 850 kg | 1375 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3300 mm | 4380 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1400 mm | 1828 mm |
