2006 Mitsubishi Raider vs. 2010 Dodge Ram
To start off, 2010 Dodge Ram is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Mitsubishi Raider. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Mitsubishi Raider would be higher. At 5,654 cc (8 cylinders), 2010 Dodge Ram is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Dodge Ram (390 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 179 more horse power than 2006 Mitsubishi Raider. (211 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Dodge Ram should accelerate faster than 2006 Mitsubishi Raider.
Let's talk about torque, 2010 Dodge Ram (552 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 233 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mitsubishi Raider. (319 Nm @ 3600 RPM). This means 2010 Dodge Ram will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mitsubishi Raider.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Mitsubishi Raider | 2010 Dodge Ram | |
Make | Mitsubishi | Dodge |
Model | Raider | Ram |
Year Released | 2006 | 2010 |
Body Type | Pickup | Pickup |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3704 cc | 5654 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 211 HP | 390 HP |
Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 5600 RPM |
Torque | 319 Nm | 552 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3600 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 6 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5590 mm | 5790 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 2020 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1750 mm | 1910 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3340 mm | 3560 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 10.7 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 18.1 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.1 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 83 L | 98 L |