2005 Kia Optima vs. 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer
To start off, 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Kia Optima. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Kia Optima would be higher. At 2,360 cc (4 cylinders), 2005 Kia Optima is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer (291 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 153 more horse power than 2005 Kia Optima. (138 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer should accelerate faster than 2005 Kia Optima.
Because 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2005 Kia Optima. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer 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, 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer (406 Nm) has 207 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Kia Optima. (199 Nm). This means 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Kia Optima.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Kia Optima | 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer | |
| Make | Kia | Mitsubishi |
| Model | Optima | Lancer |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2360 cc | 2000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 138 HP | 291 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 199 Nm | 406 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | AWD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4730 mm | 4496 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1811 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1481 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 2649 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 7.8 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 10.7 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 65 L | 55 L |
