1999 BMW X5 vs. 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer
To start off, 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer is newer by 13 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1999 BMW X5. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1999 BMW X5 would be higher. At 4,398 cc (8 cylinders), 1999 BMW X5 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1999 BMW X5 (282 HP @ 5400 RPM) has 134 more horse power than 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer. (148 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1999 BMW X5 should accelerate faster than 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer.
Because 1999 BMW X5 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1999 BMW X5 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. Let's talk about torque, 1999 BMW X5 (439 Nm @ 3600 RPM) has 243 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer. (196 Nm @ 4200 RPM). This means 1999 BMW X5 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer.
Compare all specifications:
| 1999 BMW X5 | 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer | |
| Make | BMW | Mitsubishi |
| Model | X5 | Lancer |
| Year Released | 1999 | 2012 |
| Body Type | SUV | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4398 cc | 2000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 282 HP | 148 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5400 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 439 Nm | 196 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3600 RPM | 4200 RPM |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | CVT |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4670 mm | 4582 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 1763 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1710 mm | 1516 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2730 mm | 2634 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.1 L/100km | 7.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 18.8 L/100km | 9.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 93 L | 59 L |
