2006 Land Rover LR3 vs. 2010 Mitsubishi Lancer
To start off, 2010 Mitsubishi Lancer is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Land Rover LR3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Land Rover LR3 would be higher. At 4,015 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Land Rover LR3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Mitsubishi Lancer (291 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 75 more horse power than 2006 Land Rover LR3. (216 HP @ 4500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Mitsubishi Lancer should accelerate faster than 2006 Land Rover LR3.
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, 2010 Mitsubishi Lancer (406 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 41 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Land Rover LR3. (365 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2010 Mitsubishi Lancer will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Land Rover LR3.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Land Rover LR3 | 2010 Mitsubishi Lancer | |
Make | Land Rover | Mitsubishi |
Model | LR3 | Lancer |
Year Released | 2006 | 2010 |
Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4015 cc | 2000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 216 HP | 291 HP |
Engine RPM | 4500 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Torque | 365 Nm | 406 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Drive Type | 4WD | AWD |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4860 mm | 4496 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1920 mm | 1811 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1900 mm | 1481 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2649 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 12.4 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 16.8 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 86 L | 55 L |