Real fuel consumption and economy logo

Mitsubishi Space Runner fuel consumption

Of all Mitsubishi Space Runner modifications produced from 1991 to 2002 real fuel consumption according to user ratings is similar compared to advertised consumption.

Year-to-year deviations of actual owner-reported average fuel consumption from advertised values

Year

See below for the actual consumption of generations and versions of Mitsubishi Space Runner.

1991 - 1999

Mitsubishi Space Runner 1991 fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines25.1 MPG
9.4 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines26.7 MPG
8.8 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *insignificant
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines29.0 MPG
8.1 l/100km

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Mitsubishi Space Runner 1991 with automatic transmission consumes on average 0.5 liters per 100 km or 6% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox.

Of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Mitsubishi Space Runner with 1.8 petrol engine and manual transmission (Mitsubishi Space Runner 1991 1.8i 120 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.8 liter petrol engine
Mitsubishi Space Runner 1991 1.8i 120 HP manual 26.7 MPG
8.8 l/100km
26.7 MPG
8.8 l/100km0%
Mitsubishi Space Runner 1991 1.8i 120 HP automatic 25.3 MPG
9.3 l/100km
Mitsubishi Space Runner 1991 1.8 4x4 (N21W) 122 HP manual 24.0 MPG
9.8 l/100km
24.2 MPG
9.7 l/100km-1%
2.0 liter petrol engine
Mitsubishi Space Runner 1997 2.0 16V 133 HP manual 24.5 MPG
9.6 l/100km
2.0 liter diesel engine
Mitsubishi Space Runner 1995 2.0 TD 82 HP manual 29.0 MPG
8.1 l/100km

* - Difference between advertised and user reported fuel economy has been calculated taking into account only those car versions for which information is available both on the fuel consumption specified by the manufacturer and reported by users.

User-reported fuel consumption may not accurately represent all users' experiences due to variables such as driving conditions, driving style, technical condition of the vehicle, and other circumstances. Thus, it should not be relied upon as a representative indicator.