2005 Dodge Ram vs. 2004 Mitsubishi Outlander
To start off, 2005 Dodge Ram is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mitsubishi Outlander. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mitsubishi Outlander would be higher. At 8,276 cc (10 cylinders), 2005 Dodge Ram is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Dodge Ram (494 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 336 more horse power than 2004 Mitsubishi Outlander. (158 HP @ 3800 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Dodge Ram should accelerate faster than 2004 Mitsubishi Outlander. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Dodge Ram weights approximately 1002 kg more than 2004 Mitsubishi Outlander. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2005 Dodge Ram (691 Nm) has 471 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Mitsubishi Outlander. (220 Nm). This means 2005 Dodge Ram will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Mitsubishi Outlander.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Dodge Ram | 2004 Mitsubishi Outlander | |
| Make | Dodge | Mitsubishi |
| Model | Ram | Outlander |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Pickup | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 8276 cc | 2374 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 10 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 494 HP | 158 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 3800 RPM |
| Torque | 691 Nm | 220 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 102 mm | 87 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 101 mm | 100 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.6:1 | 9.5:1 |
| Number of Seats | 6 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2472 kg | 1470 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5790 mm | 4550 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1900 mm | 1610 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3580 mm | 2730 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 19.6 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 26.1 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 23.5 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 98 L | 59 L |
