Mitsubishi ASX Vs Renault Kadjar: Which Compact SUV Wins?

In the competitive world of compact SUVs, the Mitsubishi ASX and Renault Kadjar stand out as practical choices for families, urban commuters, and weekend adventurers. Both vehicles offer a blend of versatility, modern features, and affordable pricing, but they differ significantly in powertrains, driving dynamics, and overall refinement. This comprehensive comparison dives deep into their engines, on-road behavior, interior comfort, practicality, running costs, and long-term ownership to determine which one delivers the superior package.

Overview of the Contenders

The Mitsubishi ASX has long been a staple in the small SUV segment, known for its durable build and optional four-wheel-drive capability. Recent updates brought a larger 2.0-litre naturally aspirated petrol engine, replacing the smaller unit from previous models. Paired with a CVT automatic transmission and available AWD, it aims to provide reliable performance for varied conditions.

Meanwhile, the Renault Kadjar draws from the Nissan Qashqai platform but adds distinctive French flair with its styling and tech. Its 1.3-litre turbocharged petrol engine, developed in collaboration with Daimler, pairs with either a manual or dual-clutch automatic gearbox and front-wheel drive. This setup promises punchy acceleration and better efficiency.

Starting prices hover around £25,000 for top trims, making them direct rivals in a market crowded with options like the Kia Seltos and Honda HR-V.

Engine and Performance Breakdown

Power delivery is where these SUVs diverge sharply. The ASX’s 2.0-litre four-cylinder produces 148bhp and 195Nm of torque, peaking at higher revs around 4,000rpm. This requires drivers to work the engine harder for brisk responses, resulting in a 0-60mph time of 10.1 seconds and a top speed of 118mph.

The Kadjar counters with 138bhp from its 1.3-litre turbo, but 240Nm of torque arrives earlier, enabling a slightly quicker 0-60mph in 9.9 seconds and higher top speed of 126mph. In-gear acceleration favors the Renault too, with 30-70mph matching the ASX despite using fewer revs.

The ASX shines in overtaking scenarios thanks to CVT’s instant rev-matching, but the Kadjar feels more effortless at cruising speeds due to its low-end torque.

Fuel Efficiency and Running Costs

Efficiency tests reveal tight results: the ASX averaged 33.6mpg, while the Kadjar edged ahead at 33.9mpg. However, real-world data from other comparisons shows the Kadjar’s advantage widening, with combined figures of 6.3L/100km (44.5mpg equivalent) versus the ASX’s 7.7L/100km (36.6mpg).

CO2 emissions follow suit at 143g/km for the Kadjar and 179g/km for the ASX, potentially lowering road tax for the Renault. Fuel type also matters—the ASX runs on regular 91-octane unleaded, while the Kadjar prefers premium 95-octane, which could offset savings slightly.

• ASX Pros: Larger 63L tank offers up to 818km range; 10-year warranty in some markets.
• Kadjar Pros: Lower urban (7.8L/100km) and highway (5.5L/100km) consumption; smoother DCT option.

Maintenance-wise, Mitsubishi’s extended warranty provides peace of mind, but Renault’s five-year coverage is competitive with capped-price servicing.

Handling and Ride Quality

Suspension setups highlight engineering philosophies. The ASX employs a multi-link rear axle with front MacPherson struts and optional AWD for better traction on rough terrain. Yet, despite this sophistication, the Kadjar’s torsion beam rear proves more compliant over bumps.

Drivers report the Kadjar absorbing road imperfections adeptly, thanks to sidewall cushioning from its 17-inch tyres. Handling is agile with light, precise steering and minimal body lean. The ASX feels planted but firmer, transmitting more road noise and vibrations.

Noise levels favor the Renault decisively—its turbo engine idles quietly, and wind noise is subdued. The ASX’s CVT drone under load and mechanical buzz at high revs detract from refinement.

Interior Design and Technology

Cabins reflect brand priorities. The ASX offers a functional space with durable materials, but critics note outdated plastics and build quality. Tech includes smartphone integration, but infotainment lags behind rivals.

The Kadjar impresses with a modern dashboard, ample equipment like digital clusters, and intuitive phone mirroring. Space is generous for five occupants, with supportive seats.

Practicality and Boot Space

Both SUVs excel in usability. The Kadjar pulls ahead in boot volume and folding flexibility, accommodating more luggage. The ASX’s higher ground clearance suits light off-roading, aided by AWD.

• Family-friendly features: ISOFIX points, sliding rear seats (Kadjar), and versatile cargo areas.
• Dimensions: Similar lengths, but Kadjar’s wheelbase aids rear legroom.

Safety Ratings and Features

Both earn strong Euro NCAP scores, with standard aids like autonomous braking and lane-keeping. The Kadjar adds advanced driver assists in higher trims.

Ownership Experience

Mitsubishi’s legendary reliability and warranty appeal to budget-conscious buyers. Renault has improved perceptions, but resale values may favor the ASX long-term.

Pros and Cons Summary

Which One Should You Buy?

For refined daily driving, superior comfort, and lower costs, the Renault Kadjar takes the crown. The Mitsubishi ASX suits those needing AWD and ultimate warranty security.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the Renault Kadjar more fuel-efficient than the Mitsubishi ASX?

Yes, the Kadjar achieves better combined economy at 6.3L/100km versus 7.7L/100km.

Does the ASX have four-wheel drive?

Yes, higher trims offer AWD, unlike the FWD-only Kadjar.

How do their warranties compare?

ASX provides up to 10 years; Kadjar offers 5 years.

Which has a quieter cabin?

The Kadjar, with less engine drone and road noise.

Are they safe for families?

Both score well in crash tests with comprehensive safety tech.