2004 Mitsubishi eK vs. 2010 Jeep Wrangler
To start off, 2010 Jeep Wrangler is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mitsubishi eK. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mitsubishi eK would be higher. At 3,800 cc (6 cylinders), 2010 Jeep Wrangler is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Jeep Wrangler weights approximately 1061 kg more than 2004 Mitsubishi eK.
Because 2010 Jeep Wrangler is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2004 Mitsubishi eK. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Jeep Wrangler 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. 2004 Mitsubishi eK has automatic transmission and 2010 Jeep Wrangler has manual transmission. 2010 Jeep Wrangler will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2004 Mitsubishi eK will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Mitsubishi eK | 2010 Jeep Wrangler | |
| Make | Mitsubishi | Jeep |
| Model | eK | Wrangler |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 657 cc | 3800 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 205 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 3 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 790 kg | 1851 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3400 mm | 4161 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1480 mm | 2103 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2350 mm | 2423 mm |
