Comparative FORD RANGER TDCi XLT vs MITSUBISHI L200 DI-D.

The segment of the pick-up is minority in our country, in fact it does not many years the offer it was practically void. Lucky already it is not like that and there are several brands that have models of this type.

His utilization in principally manufacturer, they are in the habit of using for hard works and in those who ask aptitudes from themselves todoterreno. But also the particular use is, to the margin of those who buy it only for the aesthetics that it will be the minimums, the principal motive of purchase his capacity of load. In them you can take enormous bundles (up to a quad in some models) and they have a maximum authorized very high weight.

 

Due to his traditional industrial orientation, the interiors of these two models that we prove do not shine precisely for his equipment and luxury of details. Yes it is necessary to say that in the Mitsubishi L200 this detail has looked after itself much more and that the Ford Ranger is more Spartan.

The position of conduction of the Mitsubishi is a bit strange. The steering wheel only is regulated in height, not in depth, the seat is raised (as in the rest of TT and SUV of the brand) and the soil is higher of the normal thing. The Ford for your part gives us details like that the right leg us meets on the lever of the reductora or an emergency brake type paragüas as the veterans Renault 4, for example.

Forget computers of on board or climatizador dually, the equipment is sufficient but without florituras. The plastic employees in the L200 transmit major quality that those of the Ranger and, in general, the Japanese gives a sensation of more car that the Ford.

The back squares are not very big, but in the Mitsubishi we have space more that sufficient for the knees and the legs fewer flexionadas go. The vertical clearance in both models is raised, but it is not necessary to stop commenting that the back doors are smaller of the normal thing and that, if we add it at a height of these vehicles, we have an a bit complicated access.

 

We cannot speak about porter in strict sense in the pick-up, rather it is a surface of load. Since you can see in the photos in both cases it is enormous, but here the advantage is for the Ranger, that there takes of series the safety arches and the protector of plastic. With the L200 in all that you it load an alone time, you will see precious rayajos in the box.

Big engines and gastones

Our two pick-up mount engines of 2,5 liters of capacity, but whereas the Ford Ranger conforms to a power of 143 CV and a driving torque of 330 Nm, the Mitsubishi L200 of our test develops (for the same price) 178 CV and a couple of 400 Nm. The difference is very notable, the L200 has power at all time and to the Ranger sometimes it weighs the anus in the raises.

The gearboxes are in both manual cases of five speeds, are precise and with short tours, but with a tact of authentic TT.

The L200 accelerates from 0 to 100 in 12 seconds, a second more rapid that the Ranger, reaches a maximum speed of 179 Km/h (158 the Ranger) and the average approved consumption is 8,1 liters to the hundred, whereas the Ford spends 9,3 to the hundred. In any case the two in royal conduction overcame widely 10 liters of average.

 

Light trucks in the end

These two pick-up do not stop being light trucks and it is obvious at the moment of leading them. They demand more effort for everything. The change is hard, the direction has many returns of steering wheel and in general they resemble a van of approximately ten years ago. On the other hand it has his grace, is a different way of driving and that transmits his sensation of being able. You go very highly, with an enormous utensil and that you know that, if it is necessary, it is raised by the walls.

They are more inconvinient than the normal todoterreno, take cross-bows in the back suspension to be able to take very much weight in the box and it is paid in the shape of constant rebounds that go direct to the kidneys. In addition in the curves they move to and fro enough (slightly more the Mitsubishi) and do not invite to running. In fact with the unloaded car it is necessary to take the things calmly because it bounces very much, blocks the back wheels in the stopped ones with facility and every two lose traction in the exits of the curves for three. The Ranger looked like to us more formalito, also because his engine has minor push that that of the Mitsubishi and it puts in fewer difficulties to the tires.

In city they are very inconvinient. They are very big to park, the radius of draft is enormous and, since you have to maneuver very much, you can finish tired.

Definitively the pick-up are vehicles thought to work. They can be used as particular vehicle but a series of disadvantages have that you must be ready to suffer if you do not want to have a smaller and comfortable car to which you hook a cart when you want to take great load.