Ford C-MAX vs. Mitsubishi Lancer Fuel Economy (km/L)

Chart is based on 179 fuel economy reports for the Ford C-MAX and 90 fuel economy reports for the Mitsubishi Lancer.

Ford C-MAX km/L

Year	Body/Powertrain	flat, hilly, or mountainousLand	driving style: very light to "lead foot"Foot	A/C use: none to heavyA/C	constant stop and goTraf %	many stops per mileCity %	stop every mile or twoSub %	fairly steady speedHwy %	Hwy Spd	km/L
2017	4dr Hatch 141-horsepower 2.0L I4 Hybrid CVT FWD	flat	light	none	0	0	53	47	69	81.8
2015	4dr Hatch 141-horsepower 2.0L I4 Hybrid CVT FWD	flat	light	light	24	37	21	19	66	101.8
2014	4dr Hatch 141-horsepower 2.0L I4 Plug-in Hybrid CVT FWD	flat	light	none	0	20	30	50	65	169.8
2013	4dr Hatch 141-horsepower 2.0L I4 Plug-in Hybrid CVT FWD	flat	light	light	17	21	42	21	70	148.2
2013	4dr Hatch 141-horsepower 2.0L I4 Hybrid CVT FWD	flat	light	light	1	18	35	46	63	101.4

Return to top

This page shows only averages. See all the Ford C-MAX fuel economy data.

Mitsubishi Lancer km/L

Year	Body/Powertrain	flat, hilly, or mountainousLand	driving style: very light to "lead foot"Foot	A/C use: none to heavyA/C	constant stop and goTraf %	many stops per mileCity %	stop every mile or twoSub %	fairly steady speedHwy %	Hwy Spd	km/L
2014	4dr Sedan turbocharged 291hp 2.0L I4 5-speed manual AWD	flat	med	none	0	0	60	40	65	50.0
2011	4dr Sedan turbocharged 291hp 2.0L I4 6-speed automated manual AWD	flat	med	hvy	15	0	10	75	70	44.7
2011	4dr Sedan turbocharged 237hp 2.0L I4 6-speed automated manual AWD	flat	med	none	30	5	5	60	75	48.5
2011	4dr Sedan 148-horsepower 2.0L I4 6-speed shiftable CVT FWD	flat	med	light	5	20	10	65	63	68.8
2011	4dr Hatch 148-horsepower 2.0L I4 6-speed shiftable CVT FWD	flat	med	light	25	20	25	30	75	62.1
2010	4dr Sedan turbocharged 291hp 2.0L I4 6-speed automated manual AWD	flat	med	none	5	15	40	40	75	47.0
2010	4dr Sedan turbocharged 237hp 2.0L I4 6-speed automated manual AWD	flat	med	light	19	16	49	16	110	9.0
Looking for a warranty? Get a quote.
2010	4dr Sedan 168-horsepower 2.4L I4 6-speed shiftable CVT FWD	flat	med	none	10	21	36	33	67	60.4
2010	4dr Sedan 168-horsepower 2.4L I4 5-speed manual FWD	flat	light	none	10	10	0	80	100	13.3
2010	4dr Hatch 168-horsepower 2.4L I4 6-speed shiftable CVT FWD	flat	med	light	0	3	38	59	70	59.6
2010	4dr Hatch 168-horsepower 2.4L I4 5-speed manual FWD	hills	med	none	6	12	41	41	120	11.8
2009	4dr Sedan turbocharged 237hp 2.0L I4 6-speed automated manual AWD	flat	med	light	6	6	34	55	70	55.6
2009	4dr Sedan 168-horsepower 2.4L I4 6-speed shiftable CVT FWD	flat	lead	none	14	21	22	43	76	60.8
2009	4dr Sedan 168-horsepower 2.4L I4 5-speed manual FWD	flat	med	light	10	21	23	45	88	41.4
2009	4dr Sedan 152-horsepower 2.0L I4 CVT FWD	flat	light	hvy	20	50	30	0	0	65.4
2009	4dr Sedan 152-horsepower 2.0L I4 5-speed manual FWD	flat	med	light	7	17	1	75	103	22.6
2008	4dr Sedan turbocharged 291hp 2.0L I4 5-speed manual AWD	flat	med	light	7	20	33	40	83	35.2
2008	4dr Sedan 152-horsepower 2.0L I4 CVT FWD	hills	med	none	10	21	14	56	80	40.0
2008	4dr Sedan 152-horsepower 2.0L I4 6-speed shiftable CVT FWD	flat	light	none	7	24	10	59	86	30.4
2008	4dr Sedan 152-horsepower 2.0L I4 5-speed manual FWD	flat	light	none	0	0	20	80	70	76.2
2006	4dr Sedan turbocharged 286hp 2.0L I4 6-speed manual AWD	flat	med	none	19	8	23	50	74	51.0
2006	4dr Sedan turbocharged 286hp 2.0L I4 5-speed manual AWD	flat	light	none	5	28	5	63	60	55.3
2006	4dr Sedan 162-horsepower 2.4L I4 4-speed automatic FWD	flat	med	none	16	16	12	57	79	49.6
2006	4dr Sedan 120-horsepower 2.0L I4 5-speed manual FWD	flat	light	hvy	0	20	0	80	70	78.6
2005	4dr Sedan turbocharged 276hp 2.0L I4 6-speed manual AWD	flat	light	none	15	5	40	40	60	49.4
2005	4dr Sedan turbocharged 276hp 2.0L I4 5-speed manual AWD	flat	lead	none	5	0	0	95	60	51.7
2005	4dr Sedan 162-horsepower 2.4L I4 5-speed manual FWD	flat	med	light	5	10	10	75	100	9.4
2003	4dr Sedan turbocharged 271hp 2.0L I4 5-speed manual AWD	flat	med	light	1	4	8	88	70	55.8
2003	4dr Sedan 120-horsepower 2.0L I4 5-speed manual FWD	flat	med	light	0	25	0	75	65	63.5
2002	4dr Sedan 120-horsepower 2.0L I4 5-speed manual FWD	flat	light	none	7	19	37	37	55	61.7
2002	4dr Sedan 120-horsepower 2.0L I4 4-speed automatic FWD	flat	light	light	18	13	25	45	65	66.9

Return to top

This page shows only averages. See all the Mitsubishi Lancer fuel economy data.

See TrueDelta's information for all Hatchbacks

See TrueDelta's information for all Ford models and Mitsubishi models.

TrueDelta Reviews the Real Gas Mileage of the Ford C-MAX

Ford C-MAX Real Gas Mileage: Pros
Year	Comment
2013	The Ford C-MAX's fuel economy is at once the #1 reason most people will buy a C-MAX, but also the model's greatest shortfall. The EPA ratings are an impressive 47 mpg city, 47 highway. In real suburban driving we (and many owners) observed trip computer averages of 33 to 40, with an overall average of 35.8. Go easy on the gas and initiate braking early enough to fully recoup kinetic energy, and low to mid 40s can happen. But 47 is a stretch. There are two ways to look at this. On the one hand, the C-MAX isn't coming close to its EPA ratings. Odds are Ford will have to make an adjustment and credit past buyers for the difference, Hyundai-Kia style. (Which actually might be a reason to buy one before this happens.) On the other hand, even 36 mpg is about 8-12 miles-per-gallon better than similarly functional non-hybrid vehicles, including the related Ford Escape. Efficiency is supported by excellent, highly configurable instrumentation. I personally opted to view a tach (rare in a hybrid), driving style ratings, and average mpg. A "brake coach" lets you know after each stop what percentage of kinetic energy was regenerated. In hybrids, this has a large impact on mpg than how hard you accelerate (more on this below). The C-MAX is also offered as an "Energi" Plug-in Hybrid rated to cruise 21 miles on electricity alone. see full Ford C-MAX review

What Our Members Are Saying about the Real Gas Mileage of the Ford C-MAX

Ford C-MAX Real Gas Mileage: Pros
Year	Body/Powertrain	Comment
2013	4dr Hatch 141-horsepower 2.0L I4 Hybrid CVT FWD	With some care, it is not too hard to surpass the revised EPA estimates of 44 city / 39 highway. It particulary shines in city and suburban driving where you can crest 50 mpg on some short trips. In mixed driving, we match the EPA estimate of 40 MPG without paying much attention. While not as great as the Prius, this efficiency was certainly a step up for us and the difference in fuel costs over a year between the C-Max and Prius was not worth the shortcomings we found in the Prius (particularly poor handling and uncomfortable seats). see full Ford C-MAX review

Ford C-MAX Real Gas Mileage: Cons
Year	Body/Powertrain	Comment
2013	4dr Hatch 141-horsepower 2.0L I4 Hybrid CVT FWD	On the down side for fuel economy, cold weather does a number on the MPG as is reported with other hybrid. On short trips (4 miles or less) on a cold start in cold weather with the heater going, expect low 20s for your MPG. This is mitigated over longer trips once the engine has warmed up, but we still get 1-3 MPG under our usual in cold weather for longer trips. see full Ford C-MAX review

TrueDelta Reviews the Real Gas Mileage of the Mitsubishi Lancer

Mitsubishi Lancer Real Gas Mileage: Cons
Year	Comment
	Mitsubishi did improve the powertrain's EPA ratings a few years ago. But they're still only 22 mpg city, 31 highway. Even the portly Dart GT manages 23/33 with a manual transmission. Credit a sixth ratio the Lancer lacks. In my suburban driving, the trip computer regularly reported averages in the high 20s. Other compacts have done better in the same driving, but not by as wide a margin as the EPA numbers would suggest. see full Mitsubishi Lancer review

What Our Members Are Saying about the Real Gas Mileage of the Mitsubishi Lancer

Mitsubishi Lancer Real Gas Mileage: Pros
Year	Body/Powertrain	Comment
2011	4dr Sedan 148-horsepower 2.0L I4 6-speed shiftable CVT FWD	I am getting consistent 27-29 MPG on mid-west (flat) back county roads during my commute. I am getting 32 MPG on the highway. My driving style is moderately spirited. see full Mitsubishi Lancer review
2010	4dr Sedan 168-horsepower 2.4L I4 6-speed shiftable CVT FWD	Uses regular gas and gets about 30 mpg. My Civic SI was getting about the same but used premium. see full Mitsubishi Lancer review
2009	4dr Sedan 168-horsepower 2.4L I4 5-speed manual FWD	Very good millage/power ratio see full Mitsubishi Lancer review
2008	4dr Sedan 152-horsepower 2.0L I4 6-speed shiftable CVT FWD	The car gets average fuel economy in its class, coming in at about 22 mpg city, 30 mpg highway, but it is well above most cars. see full Mitsubishi Lancer review

Mitsubishi Lancer Real Gas Mileage: Cons
Year	Body/Powertrain	Comment
2010	4dr Sedan 168-horsepower 2.4L I4 6-speed shiftable CVT FWD	It's not as great as you'd expect from an econobox. If this is your biggest concern, this is not the car for you. see full Mitsubishi Lancer review
2009	4dr Sedan 168-horsepower 2.4L I4 6-speed shiftable CVT FWD	17 mpg in 2.4 litter my altima that is 2.5 litter i get 23 same driving conditions hmm bigger engin better gas if it always worked out this way i would buy a bmw 335 xdrive see full Mitsubishi Lancer review
2008	4dr Sedan turbocharged 291hp 2.0L I4 5-speed manual AWD	22-24 avarage MPG see full Mitsubishi Lancer review