Last Update: Apr. 05, 2020, 5:08 a.m.
Home >>> >>> Alfa Romeo Mito and Mitsubishi Colt

What is Better Alfa Romeo Mito or Mitsubishi Colt?

Comparing Alfa Romeo Mito with Mitsubishi Colt can help people make it clear which car is worth buying. We came up with 4 reasons to choose Alfa Romeo Mito - it's better than Mitsubishi Colt, according to such specs. But Mitsubishi Colt also has got a lot of pluses: get to know 13 points why it's beating Alfa Romeo Mito. We found major characteristics of Alfa Romeo Mito and Mitsubishi Colt which were used while matching. Take speed or horse powers, measure size, and conveniently compare two cars. The most effective technical units of Alfa Romeo are presented in Mito. Which of the cars in our match would you pay for?

Exterior

Alfa Romeo Mito Mitsubishi Colt

4 reasons to buy Alfa Romeo Mito

Engine and transmission
Better compression 9.8 vs 9 8% or 0.8 . The greater degree of compression = the less fuel need to produce the same power.
Piston stroke longer 84 mm vs 82 mm 2% or 2 mm. The longer stroke = lower fuel consumption and fewer emissions.
Emissions
Less CO2 emissions 90 g/mile vs 95 g/mile 6% or 5 g/mile
Weight and capacity
More minimum boot capacity 270 liters vs 160 liters 41% or 110 liters

13 reasons to buy Mitsubishi Colt

Engine and transmission
Piston diameter larger 75.5 mm vs 72 mm 5% or 3.5 mm larger. The larger diameter of cylinder = the greater filling ratio. Cons: increase emissions of toxic substances.
More engine power

147 bhp vs 120 bhp

110 kw. vs 88 kw.

18% or 27 bhp. More power of car = more top speed.
More torque 210 nM vs 206 nM 2% or 4 nM. More torque = faster acceleration.
Performance
Faster acceleration from 0 to 60 mph 7.4 sec. vs 8.8 sec. 1.4 sec.
More top speed 131 mph vs 123 mph 8 mph
Fuel consumption
Less fuel consumption (Combined cycle) 42.83 mpg vs 46.27 mpg 8% or 3.44 mpg
Less fuel consumption (Highway) 51.42 mpg vs 56.46 mpg 10% or 5.04 mpg
Less fuel consumption (City) 33.19 mpg vs 34.91 mpg 5% or 1.72 mpg
Emissions
Higher european emission standard EURO 5 vs EURO 4 1 generation
Weight and capacity
More capacity of fuel tank 47 liters vs 45 liters 4% or 2 liters
Warranty
More warranty against corrosion 12 years vs 8 years 33% or 4 years
Other specs
Less weight 1060 kg vs 1145 kg 8% or 85 kg Weight of the vehicle affects: fuel consumption, acceleration dynamic, braking distance, etc.
Less turning radius 10.2 meters vs 11.3 meters 11% or 1.1 meters

Neutral reasons Alfa Romeo Mito vs. Mitsubishi Colt

Engine and transmission
Engine speed (RPM) 5000 RPM vs 6000 RPM 17% or 1000 less rpms.
Engine capacity 1368 cm3 vs 1468 cm3 7% or 100 cm3 less
Engine position Front transverse vs Front transverse
Cylinders location In line vs In line
Fuel supply Fuel injection with turbocharging vs Distributor fuel injection
Turbocharging Yes vs Yes
Dimensions
Length 4063 mm vs 3880 mm 5% or 183 mm shorter
Width 1720 mm vs 1695 mm 1% or 25 mm wider
Height 1446 mm vs 1520 mm 5% or 74 mm lower
Wheels and tires
Wheelbase 2511 mm vs 2500 mm 0% or 11 mm more
Front tires size 195/55 R16 vs 205/45 R16
Rear tires size 195/55 R16 vs 205/45 R16
Type of wheels 16" steel vs 16" alloy wheels
*Specs may vary depending on configurations and year of production(taken parameters of last released versions)