2000 Ford Artic vs. 2006 Mitsubishi Colt

To start off, 2006 Mitsubishi Colt is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Ford Artic. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Ford Artic would be higher. At 3,998 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Ford Artic is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford Artic (128 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 20 more horse power than 2006 Mitsubishi Colt. (108 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford Artic should accelerate faster than 2006 Mitsubishi Colt. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Mitsubishi Colt weights approximately 162 kg more than 2000 Ford Artic.

Because 2000 Ford Artic is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2000 Ford Artic. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Mitsubishi Colt, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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, 2000 Ford Artic (325 Nm) has 180 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mitsubishi Colt. (145 Nm). This means 2000 Ford Artic will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mitsubishi Colt. 2000 Ford Artic has automatic transmission and 2006 Mitsubishi Colt has manual transmission. 2006 Mitsubishi Colt will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2000 Ford Artic will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.

Compare all specifications: