Last Update: Mar. 26, 2019, 5:14 a.m.
Home >>> >>> Alfa Romeo 145 and Mitsubishi Lancer

What is Better Alfa Romeo 145 or Mitsubishi Lancer?

Exterior

Alfa Romeo 145 Mitsubishi Lancer

5 reasons to buy Alfa Romeo 145

Engine and transmission
Better compression 10 vs 9.0 10% or 1 . The greater degree of compression = the less fuel need to produce the same power.
Piston stroke longer 91 mm vs 86 mm 5% or 5 mm. The longer stroke = lower fuel consumption and fewer emissions.
Emissions
Less CO2 emissions 131 g/mile vs 151 g/mile 15% or 20 g/mile
Weight and capacity
More capacity of fuel tank 61 liters vs 55 liters 10% or 6 liters
Other specs
Less weight 1275 kg vs 1595 kg 25% or 320 kg Weight of the vehicle affects: fuel consumption, acceleration dynamic, braking distance, etc.

12 reasons to buy Mitsubishi Lancer

Engine and transmission
Piston diameter larger 86 mm vs 83 mm 3% or 3 mm larger. The larger diameter of cylinder = the greater filling ratio. Cons: increase emissions of toxic substances.
More engine power

237 bhp vs 150 bhp

177 kw. vs 110 kw.

37% or 87 bhp. More power of car = more top speed.
More torque 343 nM vs 186 nM 46% or 157 nM. More torque = faster acceleration.
Performance
Faster acceleration from 0 to 60 mph 7.1 sec. vs 8.4 sec. 1.3 sec.
More top speed 136 mph vs 130 mph 6 mph
Fuel consumption
Less fuel consumption (Combined cycle) 27.7 mpg vs 32.11 mpg 16% or 4.41 mpg
Less fuel consumption (Highway) 34.91 mpg vs 42.22 mpg 21% or 7.31 mpg
Less fuel consumption (City) 20.29 mpg vs 22.61 mpg 11% or 2.32 mpg
Emissions
Higher european emission standard EURO 4 vs EURO 2 2 generations
Weight and capacity
More maximum towing weight with brakes 1400 kg vs 1200 kg 14% or 200 kg
Warranty
More warranty against corrosion 12 years vs 8 years 33% or 4 years
More standard warranty - Mileage 994406 miles vs 62150 miles 94% or 932256 miles

Neutral reasons Alfa Romeo 145 vs. Mitsubishi Lancer

Engine and transmission
Engine speed (RPM) 6200 RPM vs 6000 RPM 3% or 200 more rpms.
Engine capacity 1970 cm3 vs 1998 cm3 1% or 28 cm3 less
Engine position Front transverse vs Front transverse
Cylinders location In line vs In line
Camshaft DOHC vs DOHC
Fuel supply Fuel injection vs Turbocharged and intercooled
Turbocharging Yes vs Yes
Speeds 5 vs 6 1 less
Dimensions
Length 4093 mm vs 4585 mm 11% or 492 mm shorter
Width 1712 mm vs 1760 mm 3% or 48 mm narrower
Height 1427 mm vs 1515 mm 6% or 88 mm lower
Wheels and tires
Wheelbase 2540 mm vs 2635 mm 4% or 95 mm less
Front tires size 195/55 VR15 vs 215/45 R18
Rear tires size 195/55 VR15 vs 215/45 R18
Spare wheel 195/55 VR15 vs Compact
Type of wheels 15" alloy wheels vs 18" alloy wheels
*Specs may vary depending on configurations and year of production(taken parameters of last released versions)