Car comparison

Mitsubishi Outlander I 2.0 i 16V 4WD TurbovsSubaru Forester III 2.5 XT

Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.

New comparison

Mitsubishi Outlander I

2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo

202 hp1997 ccGasolineAWDManualTurbochargedSUV2004-2006
VS

Subaru Forester III

2.5 XT

230 hp2457 ccGasolineAWDManualTurbochargedSUV2007-2010

Comparison overview

Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.

Best choices

Mitsubishi Outlander I 2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo

  • Fastest top speed
    220 km/h
    137 mph
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
    10.0 L/100 km
    23.5 mpg US
    28.2 mpg UK
  • Lowest city consumption
    14.1 L/100 km
    16.7 mpg US
    20.0 mpg UK
  • Lowest highway consumption
    7.6 L/100 km
    30.9 mpg US
    37.2 mpg UK
  • Best estimated range
    600 km
    373 mi
  • Largest trunk
    402 L
  • Best economy score
    80/100
  • Best practicality score
    80/100

Subaru Forester III 2.5 XT

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h
    6.0 s
  • Most powerful
    230 hp
    172 kW
  • Highest torque
    320 Nm
    236 lb-ft
  • Lightest
    1,485 kg
    3,274 lb
  • Best power-to-weight
    155 hp/t
    115 kW/t
    6.5 kg/hp
  • Best overall score
    63/100
  • Best performance score
    55/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelMitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD TurboSubaruForester III2.5 XT
Power
202hp151kW
230hp172kW
Torque
303Nm223lb-ft
320Nm236lb-ft
Curb weight
1,595kg3,516lb
1,485kg3,274lb
Gross weight
2,070kg4,564lb
2,000kg4,409lb
Top speed
220 km/h
137 mph
216 km/h
134 mph
To 99% top speed
84.3s99% target: 218 km/h / 135 mph
Calculated
58.2s99% target: 214 km/h / 133 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
7.7s
6.0s
0-200 km/h
39.0s
Calculated
30.5s
Calculated
0-60 mph
7.3s
Calculated
5.7s
Calculated
Fuel consumption
10L/100 km23.5mpg US28.2mpg UK
10.7L/100 km22mpg US26.4mpg UK
Fuel consumption city
14.1L/100 km16.7mpg US20.0mpg UK
14.7L/100 km16mpg US19.2mpg UK
Fuel consumption highway
7.6L/100 km30.9mpg US37.2mpg UK
8.4L/100 km28mpg US33.6mpg UK
Quarter mile
15.6s
Calculated
14.2s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
127hp/t94kW/t57hp/1000 lb
Calculated
155hp/t115kW/t70hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
190Nm/t127lb-ft/ton
Calculated
215Nm/t144lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range
600km373mi
Calculated
561km348mi
Calculated
Displacement
1,997cc122cu in
2,457cc150cu in
Length
4,550mm179in
4,485mm177in
Width
1,750mm69in
1,735mm68in
Height
1,620mm64in
1,590mm63in
Wheelbase
2,625mm103in
2,525mm99in
Front track
1,495mm59in
1,495mm59in
Rear track
1,495mm59in
1,485mm58in
Trunk volume
402L
387L
Max trunk volume
1,705L
-
Doors
5
5
Seats
5
5
Fuel tank
60L
60L

Performance charts

Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.

Dyno simulation

Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.

Mitsubishi Outlander I 2.0 i 16V 4WD TurboSubaru Forester III 2.5 XTPowerTorque
  • Mitsubishi Outlander I 2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo: Power / Torque
  • Subaru Forester III 2.5 XT: Power / Torque
Dyno simulation data table
VehiclePeak power RPMPeak torque RPMMax engine speed
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo5,500 rpm3,500 rpm5,750 rpm
SubaruForester III2.5 XT5,200 rpm2,800 rpm5,450 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricMitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD TurboSubaruForester III2.5 XT
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
7.3 s
5.7 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
7.7 s
6.0 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
39.0 s
30.5 s
Top speed
220 km/h
137 mph
216 km/h
134 mph
Drag race simulation
60 ft
18 m
2.5 s
2.3 s
330 ft
101 m
6.7 s
6.1 s
1/8 mile
201 m
10.2 s
9.2 s
1000 ft
305 m
13.1 s
11.9 s
1/4 mile
402 m
15.6 s
14.2 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
147 km/h
91 mph
159 km/h
99 mph

Power comparison

Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW

Chart data table
VehicleValue
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
202 hp
151 kW
SubaruForester III2.5 XT
230 hp
172 kW

Subaru Forester III 2.5 XT has 28 hp more than Mitsubishi Outlander I 2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo.

The biggest power difference is between Mitsubishi Outlander I 2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo and Subaru Forester III 2.5 XT: 28 hp (21 kW).

Torque comparison

Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft

Chart data table
VehicleValue
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
303 Nm
223 lb-ft
SubaruForester III2.5 XT
320 Nm
236 lb-ft

Curb weight comparison

Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb

Chart data table
VehicleValue
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
1,595 kg
3,516 lb
SubaruForester III2.5 XT
1,485 kg
3,274 lb

Top speed without limiter comparison

Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph

Chart data table
VehicleValue
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
220 km/h
137 mph
SubaruForester III2.5 XT
216 km/h
134 mph

0-100 km/h comparison

Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds

Chart data table
VehicleValue
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo7.7 s
SubaruForester III2.5 XT6.0 s

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Subaru Forester III 2.5 XT and Mitsubishi Outlander I 2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo: 1.7 s.

Fuel consumption comparison

Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK

Chart data table
VehicleValue
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
10.0 L/100 km
23.5 mpg US
28.2 mpg UK
SubaruForester III2.5 XT
10.7 L/100 km
22.0 mpg US
26.4 mpg UK

The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Mitsubishi Outlander I 2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo and Subaru Forester III 2.5 XT: 0.7 L/100 km.

Power-to-weight comparison

Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t

Chart data table
VehicleValue
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
127 hp/t
94 kW/t
7.9 kg/hp
SubaruForester III2.5 XT
155 hp/t
115 kW/t
6.5 kg/hp

Estimated range comparison

Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi

Chart data table
VehicleValue
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
600 km
373 mi
SubaruForester III2.5 XT
561 km
348 mi

Performance spider chart

Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.

Chart data table
VehiclePowerAccelerationTop speed
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
202 hp
151 kW
7.7 s
220 km/h
137 mph
SubaruForester III2.5 XT
230 hp
172 kW
6.0 s
216 km/h
134 mph

Most attractive quadrant

Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.

Chart data table
VehiclePerformance scorePracticality score
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
Power
202 hp
151 kW
0-100 km/h7.7 s
Top speed
220 km/h
137 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
402 L
14.2 cu ft
Length
4,550 mm
179.1 in
Height
1,620 mm
63.8 in
SubaruForester III2.5 XT
Power
230 hp
172 kW
0-100 km/h6.0 s
Top speed
216 km/h
134 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
387 L
13.7 cu ft
Length
4,485 mm
176.6 in
Height
1,590 mm
62.6 in

Performance vs fuel economy

Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.

Performance vs fuel economy data table
VehiclePerformance scoreFuel economy score
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
Power
202 hp
151 kW
0-100 km/h7.7 s
Top speed
220 km/h
137 mph
10.0 L/100 km
23.5 mpg US
28.2 mpg UK
SubaruForester III2.5 XT
Power
230 hp
172 kW
0-100 km/h6.0 s
Top speed
216 km/h
134 mph
10.7 L/100 km
22.0 mpg US
26.4 mpg UK

Subaru Forester III 2.5 XT is closest to the top-right balance target for performance and fuel economy.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption

Cars closer to the lower-left corner offer a better mix of quick acceleration and low fuel consumption.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption data table
VehicleFuel consumption, L/100 km0-100 km/h, s
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
10.0 L/100 km
23.5 mpg US
28.2 mpg UK
7.7 s
SubaruForester III2.5 XT
10.7 L/100 km
22.0 mpg US
26.4 mpg UK
6.0 s

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption

The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption data table
VehiclePower-to-weight, hp/tFuel consumption, L/100 km
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
127 hp/t
94 kW/t
7.9 kg/hp
10.0 L/100 km
23.5 mpg US
28.2 mpg UK
SubaruForester III2.5 XT
155 hp/t
115 kW/t
6.5 kg/hp
10.7 L/100 km
22.0 mpg US
26.4 mpg UK

Detailed score breakdown

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleMitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD TurboSubaruForester III2.5 XT
Power
202 hp
151 kW
230 hp
172 kW
Torque
303 Nm
223 lb-ft
320 Nm
236 lb-ft
Acceleration
7.7 s
6.0 s
Top speed
220 km/h
137 mph
216 km/h
134 mph
Lightness
1,595 kg
3,516 lb
1,485 kg
3,274 lb
Fuel consumption
10.0 L/100 km
23.5 mpg US
28.2 mpg UK
10.7 L/100 km
22.0 mpg US
26.4 mpg UK
Practicality
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
402 L
14.2 cu ft
Length
4,550 mm
179.1 in
Height
1,620 mm
63.8 in
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
387 L
13.7 cu ft
Length
4,485 mm
176.6 in
Height
1,590 mm
62.6 in
Range score
600 km
373 mi
561 km
348 mi
Trunk score
402 L
14.2 cu ft
387 L
13.7 cu ft
Power-to-weight score
127 hp/t
94 kW/t
7.9 kg/hp
155 hp/t
115 kW/t
6.5 kg/hp
Overall
Fixed score
Fixed score

Fuel cost and annual usage

Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.

Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.

LC = Local Currency

Fuel cost and annual usage
VehicleMitsubishi Outlander I 2.0 i 16V 4WD TurboSubaru Forester III 2.5 XT
Consumption10 L/100 km23.5 mpg US28.2 mpg UK10.7 L/100 km22 mpg US26.4 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km17.50 LC100 km18.72 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi28.16 LC100 mi30.13 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used1,500 L396 US gal330 UK gal1,605 L424 US gal353 UK gal
Annual fuel cost2,625 LC/year2,809 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

Mitsubishi Outlander I 2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo

  • Has 4 km/h (2 mph) higher top speed
  • Uses 0.7 L/100 km less fuel
  • Has 39 km (24 mi) more estimated range
  • Has 15 L more trunk volume

Pros

  • Highest top speed
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
  • Best estimated range
  • Largest trunk

Cons

  • Slowest 0-100 km/h
  • Lowest power
  • Heaviest

Subaru Forester III 2.5 XT

  • Has 28 hp more
  • Has 17 Nm more
  • Is 110 kg lighter
  • Is 1.7 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
  • Has 28 hp/t better power-to-weight

Pros

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
  • Most powerful
  • Highest torque
  • Lightest
  • Best power-to-weight ratio

Cons

  • Highest combined fuel consumption
  • Lowest top speed
  • Smallest trunk

Choose cars to compare

Brand
Model
Generation
Engine or modification
Mitsubishi Outlander I 2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
Subaru Forester III 2.5 XT
Compare selected cars
2 vehicles selected

Popular comparisons

2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
3.0d
VS
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD TurbovsBMWX3 (E83)3.0d
2.5 XT
2.5 Turbo
VS
SubaruForester III2.5 XTvsSubaruForester IIIFacelift 20102.5 Turbo
2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
2.0 FSI
VS
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD TurbovsSeatAltea Freetrack2.0 FSI
2.5 XT
2.5 i 16V Turbo
VS
SubaruForester III2.5 XTvsSubaruForester II2.5 i 16V Turbo
2.5 XT
2.0
VS
SubaruForester III2.5 XTvsSubaruForester IV2.0
2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
2.0 TSI
VS
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD TurbovsVolkswagenTiguan I2.0 TSI
2.5 XT
Sport 2.0 T
VS
SubaruForester III2.5 XTvsSubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T
2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
2.0 TFSI
VS
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD TurbovsAUDIQ5 I (8R)2.0 TFSI
2.5 XT
GLK 280 V6
VS
SubaruForester III2.5 XTvsMercedes-BenzGLK (X204)GLK 280 V6
2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
2.0 TFSI
VS
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD TurbovsSeatAltea FreetrackFacelift 20092.0 TFSI
2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo
23d
VS
MitsubishiOutlander I2.0 i 16V 4WD TurbovsBMWX1 (E84)23d
2.5 XT
3.5
VS
SubaruForester III2.5 XTvsNissanMurano II (Z51)3.5
Mitsubishi Outlander I 2.0 i 16V 4WD Turbo vs Subaru Forester III 2.5 XT - car comparison - FastVsFaster