DETAILED CAR COMPARISON

1996 Mitsubishi FTO vs 1996 Audi A3 Comparison

Compare technical specifications, scores and everyday-use differences side by side.

VS
WINNER

Mitsubishi FTO

Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 1 points.

64.5–63.5
SPECIFICATION GROUPS

Every difference between the two cars

Basic Specifications

MitsubishiMakeAudi
FTOModelA3
1996Model year1996
CoupeBody typeHatchback
2Seats5
2Doors3

Performance

—0–100 km/h9,7 s
200 km/hTop speed202 km/h
1834 ccEngine displacement1781 cc
126 HPPower125 HP
161 NmTorque173 Nm
4Cylinders4

Fuel & Consumption

PetrolFuel typePetrol
60 ltFuel tank55 lt
—Urban consumption10,6 lt
—Extra-urban consumption6,2 lt
17,8 ltAverage consumption7,8 lt

Transmission & Chassis

Front-wheel driveDrivetrainFront-wheel drive
5Gears5
185/70 R14 STyre size195/65 R15
YesABSYes

Dimensions

4320 mmLength4152 mm
1735 mmWidth1735 mm
1300 mmHeight1427 mm
1100 KgWeight1140 Kg
2500 mmWheelbase2513 mm

E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note

1996 Mitsubishi FTO and 1996 Audi A3 approach the same decision from different angles. We compare the exact versions so changes in engine, transmission, dimensions and equipment are not hidden behind the model names.

Overall, Mitsubishi FTO leads the E-Kıyasla score by 1 points. The score provides a consistent summary, while the best choice can still change with priorities such as urban efficiency, luggage space, performance or equipment.

SIMILAR COMPARISONS

Similar comparisons

Explore related comparisons featuring cars from this matchup.

Comments are loading…