2008 Land Rover Range Rover vs. 1994 Mitsubishi FTO
To start off, 2008 Land Rover Range Rover is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1994 Mitsubishi FTO. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1994 Mitsubishi FTO would be higher. At 4,394 cc (8 cylinders), 2008 Land Rover Range Rover is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2008 Land Rover Range Rover (305 HP @ 5750 RPM) has 108 more horse power than 1994 Mitsubishi FTO. (197 HP @ 7500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2008 Land Rover Range Rover should accelerate faster than 1994 Mitsubishi FTO.
2008 Land Rover Range Rover has automatic transmission and 1994 Mitsubishi FTO has manual transmission. 1994 Mitsubishi FTO will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2008 Land Rover Range Rover will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2008 Land Rover Range Rover | 1994 Mitsubishi FTO | |
| Make | Land Rover | Mitsubishi |
| Model | Range Rover | FTO |
| Year Released | 2008 | 1994 |
| Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4394 cc | 1996 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 305 HP | 197 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5750 RPM | 7500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Acceleration 0-100mph | 8.3 seconds | 6.5 seconds |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4980 mm | 4370 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2200 mm | 1740 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1820 mm | 1310 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2510 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 12.4 L/100km | 8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 16.8 L/100km | 12 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 14.9 L/100km | 10 L/100km |
