2016 Mitsubishi Space Star MPG is between 47 MPG and 65 MPG depending on engine:
The 2016 Mitsubishi Space Star MPG to weight ratio is shown in the graph:
We calculated that 2016 Mitsubishi Space Star MPG is up to 78% better than the world average consumption.
| Vehicle | Consumption (city / highway) | Consumption to weight ratio | Difference from world average consumption | Driving range (full tank) | Consumption per passenger |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 MIVEC |
47
/
65 MPG
(5 / 3.6 L per 100 km) |
2 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 75% better |
435—621 miles
(700—1000 km) |
0.8 L per 100 km / person |
| 1.2 MIVEC |
51
/
62 MPG
(4.6 / 3.8 L per 100 km) |
2.1 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 78% better |
497—559 miles
(800—900 km) |
0.8 L per 100 km / person |
| Vehicle | 1.0 MIVEC |
|---|---|
| Consumption (city / highway) |
47
/
65 MPG
(5 / 3.6 L per 100 km) |
| Consumption to weight ratio | 2 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
| Difference from world average consumption | 75% better |
| Driving range (full tank) | 435—621 miles (700—1000 km) |
| Consumption per passenger | 0.8 L per 100 km / person |
| Vehicle | 1.2 MIVEC |
| Consumption (city / highway) |
51
/
62 MPG
(4.6 / 3.8 L per 100 km) |
| Consumption to weight ratio | 2.1 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
| Difference from world average consumption | 78% better |
| Driving range (full tank) | 497—559 miles (800—900 km) |
| Consumption per passenger | 0.8 L per 100 km / person |
2012 Mitsubishi Space Star MPG is between 44 MPG and 65 MPG depending on engine:
We calculated that 2012 Mitsubishi Space Star MPG is up to 84% better than the world average consumption.
| Vehicle | Consumption (city / highway) | Consumption to weight ratio | Difference from world average consumption | Driving range (full tank) | Consumption per passenger |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 |
51
/
65 MPG
(4.6 / 3.6 L per 100 km) |
- | 84% better |
497—621 miles
(800—1000 km) |
0.8 L per 100 km / person |
| 1.2 |
44
/
59 MPG
(5.3 / 4 L per 100 km) |
- | 63% better |
435—559 miles
(700—900 km) |
0.9 L per 100 km / person |
| Vehicle | 1.0 |
|---|---|
| Consumption (city / highway) |
51
/
65 MPG
(4.6 / 3.6 L per 100 km) |
| Consumption to weight ratio | - |
| Difference from world average consumption | 84% better |
| Driving range (full tank) | 497—621 miles (800—1000 km) |
| Consumption per passenger | 0.8 L per 100 km / person |
| Vehicle | 1.2 |
| Consumption (city / highway) |
44
/
59 MPG
(5.3 / 4 L per 100 km) |
| Consumption to weight ratio | - |
| Difference from world average consumption | 63% better |
| Driving range (full tank) | 435—559 miles (700—900 km) |
| Consumption per passenger | 0.9 L per 100 km / person |
1998 Mitsubishi Space Star MPG is between 25 MPG and 51 MPG depending on engine:
The 1998 Mitsubishi Space Star MPG to weight ratio is shown in the graph:
We calculated that 1998 Mitsubishi Space Star MPG is up to 34% better than the world average consumption.
| Vehicle | Consumption (city / highway) | Consumption to weight ratio | Difference from world average consumption | Driving range (full tank) | Consumption per passenger |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.8 16V |
26
/
38 MPG
(8.9 / 6.2 L per 100 km) |
1.6 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 3% worse |
373—559 miles
(600—900 km) |
1.5 L per 100 km / person |
| 1.8 GDI |
25
/
39 MPG
(9.4 / 6.1 L per 100 km) |
1.7 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 0% |
373—559 miles
(600—900 km) |
1.5 L per 100 km / person |
| 1.3 16V |
27
/
42 MPG
(8.6 / 5.6 L per 100 km) |
1.6 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 3% better |
373—621 miles
(600—1000 km) |
1.4 L per 100 km / person |
| 1.6 |
26
/
40 MPG
(9.2 / 5.9 L per 100 km) |
1.7 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 3% better |
373—559 miles
(600—900 km) |
1.4 L per 100 km / person |
| 1.9 DI-D |
33
/
51 MPG
(7.2 / 4.6 L per 100 km) |
2.5 L per 100 km to 100 kg | 34% better |
497—746 miles
(800—1200 km) |
1.1 L per 100 km / person |
| Vehicle | 1.8 16V |
|---|---|
| Consumption (city / highway) |
26
/
38 MPG
(8.9 / 6.2 L per 100 km) |
| Consumption to weight ratio | 1.6 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
| Difference from world average consumption | 3% worse |
| Driving range (full tank) | 373—559 miles (600—900 km) |
| Consumption per passenger | 1.5 L per 100 km / person |
| Vehicle | 1.8 GDI |
| Consumption (city / highway) |
25
/
39 MPG
(9.4 / 6.1 L per 100 km) |
| Consumption to weight ratio | 1.7 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
| Difference from world average consumption | 0% better |
| Driving range (full tank) | 373—559 miles (600—900 km) |
| Consumption per passenger | 1.5 L per 100 km / person |
| Vehicle | 1.3 16V |
| Consumption (city / highway) |
27
/
42 MPG
(8.6 / 5.6 L per 100 km) |
| Consumption to weight ratio | 1.6 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
| Difference from world average consumption | 3% better |
| Driving range (full tank) | 373—621 miles (600—1000 km) |
| Consumption per passenger | 1.4 L per 100 km / person |
| Vehicle | 1.6 |
| Consumption (city / highway) |
26
/
40 MPG
(9.2 / 5.9 L per 100 km) |
| Consumption to weight ratio | 1.7 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
| Difference from world average consumption | 3% better |
| Driving range (full tank) | 373—559 miles (600—900 km) |
| Consumption per passenger | 1.4 L per 100 km / person |
| Vehicle | 1.9 DI-D |
| Consumption (city / highway) |
33
/
51 MPG
(7.2 / 4.6 L per 100 km) |
| Consumption to weight ratio | 2.5 L per 100 km to 100 kg |
| Difference from world average consumption | 34% better |
| Driving range (full tank) | 497—746 miles (800—1200 km) |
| Consumption per passenger | 1.1 L per 100 km / person |
