Mitsubishi Space Runner: Which Version to Buy and Why
The Mitsubishi Space Runner version to choose depends on whether the priority is performance, fuel consumption, transmission convenience or AWD. Among the available figures, the second-generation 2.4 MT is the quickest and fastest version, reaching 100 km/h in 10.4 seconds and 190 km/h. The first-generation Gasoline 1.8 MT with FWD records the lowest measured combined consumption at 8.8 l/100 km.
The Mitsubishi Space Runner version to choose depends on whether the priority is performance, fuel consumption, transmission convenience or AWD. Among the available figures, the second-generation 2.4 MT is the quickest and fastest version, reaching 100 km/h in 10.4 seconds and 190 km/h. The first-generation Gasoline 1.8 MT with FWD records the lowest measured combined consumption at 8.8 l/100 km. Buyers seeking AWD have one listed choice: the first-generation 1.8 MT with 122 hp. The Diesel 2.0 MT supplies its maximum 172 Nm at 2500 rpm, but its fuel consumption is not measured.
Mitsubishi Space Runner generations compared
The first generation ran from September 1991 to February 1999. It is a Compact Van with five listed versions: three Gasoline 1.8 variants, one Gasoline 2.0 MT and one Diesel 2.0 MT. Its selection includes Manual and Automatic transmissions, FWD and AWD, and both naturally aspirated Gasoline engines and a Turbo Diesel engine. This generation covers models searched for by year, including the Mitsubishi Space Runner 1995, 1997 and 1998.
The second generation ran from March 1999 to August 2002. It is also a Compact Van and has four versions: 2.0 MT, 2.0 AT, 2.4 AT and 2.4 MT. Every listed second-generation version has FWD and a front, transverse Gasoline engine. Compared with the first generation, the range no longer includes AWD or Diesel, while output rises to either 136 hp or 150 hp. This generation covers the Mitsubishi Space Runner 2000 and 2002.
Mitsubishi Space Runner engine and transmission specs
Because some version names repeat, the generation, power and fuel type identify each one precisely. In the first generation, 1.8 MT appears both as a 122 hp AWD version and as a 122 hp FWD version. The name 2.0 MT appears as a 133 hp Gasoline version and an 82 hp Diesel version.
| Generation | Exact version | Power | Torque | Displacement | Fuel | Cylinders and layout | Boost | Gearbox | Drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First | 1.8 MT, 122 hp, AWD | 122 hp | 161 Nm | 1834 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5-speed | AWD |
| First | 1.8 AT, 122 hp | 122 hp | 161 Nm | 1834 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4-speed | FWD |
| First | 1.8 MT, 122 hp, FWD | 122 hp | 161 Nm | 1834 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5-speed | FWD |
| First | 2.0 MT, 133 hp, Gasoline | 133 hp | 176 Nm | 1997 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5-speed | FWD |
| First | 2.0 MT, 82 hp, Diesel | 82 hp | 172 Nm | 1998 cc | Diesel | 4, Inline | Turbo | Manual, 5-speed | FWD |
| Second | 2.0 MT | 136 hp | 178 Nm | 1997 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5-speed | FWD |
| Second | 2.0 AT | 136 hp | 178 Nm | 1997 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4-speed | FWD |
| Second | 2.4 AT | 150 hp | 214 Nm | 2351 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4-speed | FWD |
| Second | 2.4 MT | 150 hp | 214 Nm | 2351 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5-speed | FWD |
The first-generation 1834 cc Gasoline engine produces about 66.5 hp per litre. Its 122 hp and 161 Nm are identical across 1.8 MT AWD, 1.8 AT FWD and 1.8 MT FWD, so transmission and drive system—not engine output—separate these versions.
The first-generation 1997 cc Gasoline engine develops about 66.6 hp per litre, while the second-generation 1997 cc engine develops about 68.1 hp per litre. The newer 2.0 versions add 3 hp and 2 Nm over the earlier Gasoline 2.0 MT. The second-generation 2351 cc engine produces about 63.8 hp per litre, but its 150 hp and 214 Nm are the highest absolute figures in the range.
The Diesel 2.0 MT produces about 41.0 hp per litre. Its 172 Nm arrives at 2500 rpm, compared with 161 Nm at 4500 rpm for the first-generation 1.8 Gasoline versions and 176 Nm at 4750 rpm for the first-generation Gasoline 2.0 MT.
Performance and fuel consumption
| Generation | Exact version | 0–100 km/h | Top speed | City | Highway | Combined |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First | 1.8 MT, 122 hp, AWD | 11.5 s | 175 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| First | 1.8 AT, 122 hp | 12.3 s | 170 km/h | 12.3 l/100 km | 7.6 l/100 km | 9.3 l/100 km |
| First | 1.8 MT, 122 hp, FWD | 10.5 s | 180 km/h | 11.7 l/100 km | 7.1 l/100 km | 8.8 l/100 km |
| First | 2.0 MT, 133 hp, Gasoline | 11.2 s | 185 km/h | 10.7 l/100 km | 7.1 l/100 km | 9.6 l/100 km |
| First | 2.0 MT, 82 hp, Diesel | 17.8 s | 155 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| Second | 2.0 MT | 11.0 s | 185 km/h | 12.2 l/100 km | 7.5 l/100 km | 9.4 l/100 km |
| Second | 2.0 AT | 13.3 s | 175 km/h | 13.3 l/100 km | 8.3 l/100 km | 10.1 l/100 km |
| Second | 2.4 AT | 12.9 s | 180 km/h | 12.7 l/100 km | 7.7 l/100 km | 9.5 l/100 km |
| Second | 2.4 MT | 10.4 s | 190 km/h | 11.9 l/100 km | 7.3 l/100 km | 9.4 l/100 km |
For performance, the second-generation 2.4 MT leads the supplied figures. It is 2.5 seconds quicker to 100 km/h and 10 km/h faster than the 2.4 AT despite sharing the same 150 hp and 214 Nm engine. Their measured combined consumption differs by only 0.1 l/100 km in favour of the Manual.
Transmission also creates a clear difference between the second-generation 2.0 versions. The 2.0 MT reaches 100 km/h 2.3 seconds sooner and has a top speed 10 km/h higher than the 2.0 AT. It also uses 1.1 l/100 km less in the city, 0.8 l/100 km less on the highway and 0.7 l/100 km less combined.
Among first-generation 1.8 FWD versions, the 1.8 MT reaches 100 km/h 1.8 seconds sooner than the 1.8 AT and has a top speed 10 km/h higher. Its measured combined consumption is 0.5 l/100 km lower. The AWD 1.8 MT records 11.5 seconds and 175 km/h, but its consumption is not measured, so an economy comparison with the FWD versions cannot be made from the supplied data.
Weight, ground clearance, tank and wheel sizes
| Generation | Exact version | Kerb weight | Gross weight | Weight per hp | Ground clearance | Tank | Wheel sizes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First | 1.8 MT, 122 hp, AWD | 1315 kg | 1800 kg | 10.8 kg/hp | 150 mm | 55 l | not measured |
| First | 1.8 AT, 122 hp | 1210 kg | 1720 kg | 9.9 kg/hp | 150 mm | 55 l | not measured |
| First | 1.8 MT, 122 hp, FWD | 1190 kg | 1720 kg | 9.8 kg/hp | 150 mm | 55 l | not measured |
| First | 2.0 MT, 133 hp, Gasoline | 1210 kg | 1745 kg | 9.1 kg/hp | 150 mm | 55 l | not measured |
| First | 2.0 MT, 82 hp, Diesel | 1260 kg | 1760 kg | 15.4 kg/hp | 150 mm | 55 l | not measured |
| Second | 2.0 MT | 1300 kg | 1880 kg | 9.6 kg/hp | 150 mm | 63 l | not measured |
| Second | 2.0 AT | 1380 kg | 1880 kg | 10.1 kg/hp | 150 mm | 63 l | not measured |
| Second | 2.4 AT | 1420 kg | 1920 kg | 9.5 kg/hp | 150 mm | 63 l | not measured |
| Second | 2.4 MT | 1400 kg | 1920 kg | 9.3 kg/hp | 150 mm | 63 l | not measured |
The first-generation Gasoline 2.0 MT has the lowest weight-per-power figure at about 9.1 kg/hp, narrowly ahead of the second-generation 2.4 MT at about 9.3 kg/hp. The Diesel 2.0 MT has the highest figure at about 15.4 kg/hp, consistent with its 17.8-second acceleration result.
Within the first-generation 1.8 range, adding AWD corresponds to a kerb-weight increase of 125 kg over the FWD 1.8 MT. The 1.8 AT is 20 kg heavier than the FWD 1.8 MT. In the second generation, the 2.0 AT is 80 kg heavier than the 2.0 MT, while the 2.4 AT is 20 kg heavier than the 2.4 MT.
Every version has 150 mm of ground clearance. First-generation versions use a 55-litre tank, while second-generation versions use a 63-litre tank, an increase of 8 litres. Wheel sizes are not measured for any listed version.
Which Mitsubishi Space Runner version fits each priority?
For the strongest measured performance, the second-generation 2.4 MT combines 150 hp, 214 Nm, a 10.4-second 0–100 km/h time and a 190 km/h top speed. It also matches the second-generation 2.0 MT at 9.4 l/100 km combined, despite adding 14 hp and 36 Nm.
For an Automatic, the second-generation 2.4 AT offers 14 hp and 36 Nm more than the 2.0 AT. It is 0.4 seconds quicker to 100 km/h, reaches a top speed 5 km/h higher and records combined consumption 0.6 l/100 km lower. On the supplied figures, moving from 2.0 AT to 2.4 AT adds engine output without increasing measured fuel consumption.
For the lowest measured combined consumption, the first-generation FWD 1.8 MT records 8.8 l/100 km. It also reaches 100 km/h in 10.5 seconds, just 0.1 seconds behind the second-generation 2.4 MT, although its top speed is 10 km/h lower.
For AWD, the first-generation 1.8 MT with 122 hp is the sole listed option. It has a 5-speed Manual gearbox, 161 Nm, a 1315 kg kerb weight and a 175 km/h top speed. Its city, highway and combined consumption figures are not measured.
For low-rpm torque delivery, the first-generation Diesel 2.0 MT produces 172 Nm at 2500 rpm. Its trade-off in the available measurements is performance: 0–100 km/h takes 17.8 seconds and top speed is 155 km/h. Fuel consumption is not measured, so the data does not establish an economy advantage.
For a balance of power and weight, the first-generation Gasoline 2.0 MT pairs 133 hp with a 1210 kg kerb weight, or about 9.1 kg per horsepower. It reaches 185 km/h and records 9.6 l/100 km combined. The second-generation 2.0 MT adds 3 hp and 2 Nm, improves the 0–100 km/h time by 0.2 seconds and lowers measured combined consumption by 0.2 l/100 km, but it is 90 kg heavier.
The practical shortlist is therefore defined by priorities: 2.4 MT for maximum performance, first-generation FWD 1.8 MT for the lowest measured combined consumption, first-generation 1.8 MT AWD when AWD is required, 2.4 AT for the stronger Automatic configuration, and Diesel 2.0 MT when its 172 Nm at 2500 rpm matters more than measured acceleration. Reliability, problems, sale prices and current availability cannot be compared because those figures are not measured in the supplied data.