2005 Mitsubishi Outlander vs. 2013 Kia Optima
To start off, 2013 Kia Optima is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Mitsubishi Outlander. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Mitsubishi Outlander would be higher. At 2,376 cc (4 cylinders), 2005 Mitsubishi Outlander is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Kia Optima (270 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 107 more horse power than 2005 Mitsubishi Outlander. (163 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Kia Optima should accelerate faster than 2005 Mitsubishi Outlander. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Kia Optima weights approximately 28 kg more than 2005 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, 2013 Kia Optima (365 Nm) has 152 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Mitsubishi Outlander. (213 Nm). This means 2013 Kia Optima will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Mitsubishi Outlander.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Mitsubishi Outlander | 2013 Kia Optima | |
| Make | Mitsubishi | Kia |
| Model | Outlander | Optima |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2013 |
| Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2376 cc | 2000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 163 HP | 270 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 213 Nm | 365 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 87 mm | 86 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 100 mm | 86 mm |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1510 kg | 1538 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4550 mm | 4845 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1830 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1690 mm | 1455 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2795 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.1 L/100km | 5.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 11.2 L/100km | 9.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 59 L | 70 L |
