Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution vs. Pontiac GTO

Add new car
2015 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution
$34,495
See all results
2006 Pontiac GTO
$31,290
See all results
Add new car
 
Hide similarities

Highlights

$34,495
Starting MSRP
$31,290
Starting MSRP
-
Starting MSRP
Intercooled Turbo Premium Unleaded I-4
Engine Type
Gas V8
Engine Type
-
Engine Type
17 City / 23 Hwy
MPG
17 City / 25 Hwy
MPG
-
MPG
291 hp
Horsepower
400 hp
Horsepower
-
Horsepower
All Wheel Drive
Drive Type
Rear Wheel Drive
Drive Type
-
Drive Type
5
Seating Capacity
4
Seating Capacity
-
Seating Capacity
3 yr / 36,000 mi
Basic Warranty
3 yr / 36,000 mi
Basic Warranty
-
Basic Warranty

Engine

Intercooled Turbo Premium Unleaded I-4
Engine Type
Gas V8
Engine Type
-
Engine Type
300 @ 4000
SAE Net Torque @ RPM
400 @ 4000
SAE Net Torque @ RPM
-
SAE Net Torque @ RPM
2.0 L/122
Displacement
6.0L/364
Displacement
-
Displacement
291 @ 6500
SAE Net Horsepower @ RPM
400 @ 5200
SAE Net Horsepower @ RPM
-
SAE Net Horsepower @ RPM
M/T
5-Speed M/T
Transmission Options
M/T
6-Speed M/T
A/T
4-Speed A/T
Transmission Options
-
Transmission Options
17 City / 23 Hwy
MPG
17 City / 25 Hwy
MPG
-
MPG
N/A
Total Cooling System Capacity
11.5 qts
Total Cooling System Capacity
-
Total Cooling System Capacity

Tires & Wheels

18 X 8.5 in
Rear Wheel Size
17 x 8 in
Rear Wheel Size
-
Rear Wheel Size
P245/40YR18
Front Tire Size
P245/45ZR17
Front Tire Size
-
Front Tire Size
Aluminum
Rear Wheel Material
Aluminum
Rear Wheel Material
-
Rear Wheel Material
Compact in
Spare Wheel Size
N/A
Spare Wheel Size
-
Spare Wheel Size
Steel
Spare Wheel Material
Aluminum
Spare Wheel Material
-
Spare Wheel Material
Aluminum
Front Wheel Material
Aluminum
Front Wheel Material
-
Front Wheel Material
P245/40YR18
Rear Tire Size
P245/45ZR17
Rear Tire Size
-
Rear Tire Size
Compact
Spare Tire Size
P245/45ZR17
Spare Tire Size
-
Spare Tire Size
18 X 8.5 in
Front Wheel Size
17 x 8 in
Front Wheel Size
-
Front Wheel Size

Suspension

Multi-Link
Suspension Type - Rear (Cont.)
Not Available
Suspension Type - Rear (Cont.)
-
Suspension Type - Rear (Cont.)
Strut
Suspension Type - Front
Independent
Suspension Type - Front
-
Suspension Type - Front
Strut
Suspension Type - Front (Cont.)
MacPherson strut
Suspension Type - Front (Cont.)
-
Suspension Type - Front (Cont.)
Multi-Link
Suspension Type - Rear
Independent
Suspension Type - Rear
-
Suspension Type - Rear

Steering

N/A
Steering Ratio (:1), Overall
N/A
Steering Ratio (:1), Overall
-
Steering Ratio (:1), Overall
N/A
Lock to Lock Turns (Steering)
3
Lock to Lock Turns (Steering)
-
Lock to Lock Turns (Steering)
N/A
Turning Diameter - Wall to Wall
N/A
Turning Diameter - Wall to Wall
-
Turning Diameter - Wall to Wall
39 ft
Turning Diameter - Curb to Curb
36 ft
Turning Diameter - Curb to Curb
-
Turning Diameter - Curb to Curb
Rack-Pinion
Steering Type
Pwr Rack & Pinion
Steering Type
-
Steering Type

Measurements

41 in
Front Head Room
37 in
Front Head Room
-
Front Head Room
36 in
Second Leg Room
37 in
Second Leg Room
-
Second Leg Room
54 in
Second Hip Room
50 in
Second Hip Room
-
Second Hip Room
5
Passenger Capacity
4
Passenger Capacity
-
Passenger Capacity
61 in
Track Width, Rear
62 in
Track Width, Rear
-
Track Width, Rear
7 ft³
Trunk Volume
7 ft³
Trunk Volume
-
Trunk Volume
54 in
Second Shoulder Room
52 in
Second Shoulder Room
-
Second Shoulder Room
55 in
Front Shoulder Room
60 in
Front Shoulder Room
-
Front Shoulder Room
93 ft³
Passenger Volume
91 ft³
Passenger Volume
-
Passenger Volume
42 in
Front Leg Room
42 in
Front Leg Room
-
Front Leg Room
104 in
Wheelbase
110 in
Wheelbase
-
Wheelbase
58 in
Height, Overall
55 in
Height, Overall
-
Height, Overall
N/A
Liftover Height
N/A
Liftover Height
-
Liftover Height
53 in
Front Hip Room
58 in
Front Hip Room
-
Front Hip Room
6 in
Min Ground Clearance
N/A
Min Ground Clearance
-
Min Ground Clearance
177 in
Length, Overall
190 in
Length, Overall
-
Length, Overall
61 in
Track Width, Front
62 in
Track Width, Front
-
Track Width, Front
37 in
Second Head Room
37 in
Second Head Room
-
Second Head Room
71 in
Width, Max w/o mirrors
73 in
Width, Max w/o mirrors
-
Width, Max w/o mirrors

Weight & Capacity

N/A
Wt Distributing Hitch - Max Tongue Wt.
N/A
Wt Distributing Hitch - Max Tongue Wt.
-
Wt Distributing Hitch - Max Tongue Wt.
N/A
Dead Weight Hitch - Max Tongue Wt.
100 lbs
Dead Weight Hitch - Max Tongue Wt.
-
Dead Weight Hitch - Max Tongue Wt.
N/A
Aux Fuel Tank Capacity, Approx
N/A
Aux Fuel Tank Capacity, Approx
-
Aux Fuel Tank Capacity, Approx
N/A
Wt Distributing Hitch - Max Trailer Wt.
N/A
Wt Distributing Hitch - Max Trailer Wt.
-
Wt Distributing Hitch - Max Trailer Wt.
N/A
Dead Weight Hitch - Max Trailer Wt.
1,000 lbs
Dead Weight Hitch - Max Trailer Wt.
-
Dead Weight Hitch - Max Trailer Wt.
15 gal
Fuel Tank Capacity, Approx
18 gal
Fuel Tank Capacity, Approx
-
Fuel Tank Capacity, Approx
3,527 lbs
Base Curb Weight
3,725 lbs
Base Curb Weight
-
Base Curb Weight

Safety

Standard
Stability Control
-
Stability Control
-
Stability Control

Entertainment

Standard
Bluetooth®
-
Bluetooth®
-
Bluetooth®

Electrical

130
Maximum Alternator Capacity (amps)
N/A
Maximum Alternator Capacity (amps)
-
Maximum Alternator Capacity (amps)
710
Cold Cranking Amps @ 0° F (Primary)
N/A
Cold Cranking Amps @ 0° F (Primary)
-
Cold Cranking Amps @ 0° F (Primary)

Brakes

4-Wheel Disc
Brake Type
Pwr
Brake Type
-
Brake Type
Not Available
Drum - Rear (Yes or )
Not Available
Drum - Rear (Yes or )
-
Drum - Rear (Yes or )
13 in
Rear Brake Rotor Diam x Thickness
11.3 x -TBD- in
Rear Brake Rotor Diam x Thickness
-
Rear Brake Rotor Diam x Thickness
Yes
Disc - Front (Yes or )
Yes
Disc - Front (Yes or )
-
Disc - Front (Yes or )
N/A
Brake ABS System (Second Line)
N/A
Brake ABS System (Second Line)
-
Brake ABS System (Second Line)
4-Wheel
Brake ABS System
4-Wheel
Brake ABS System
-
Brake ABS System
14 in
Front Brake Rotor Diam x Thickness
11.7 x -TBD- in
Front Brake Rotor Diam x Thickness
-
Front Brake Rotor Diam x Thickness
Yes
Disc - Rear (Yes or )
Yes
Disc - Rear (Yes or )
-
Disc - Rear (Yes or )

FAQ

Which is more reliable, the 2015 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution or the 2006 Pontiac GTO?

The 2015 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution is more reliable than the 2006 Pontiac GTO according to Cars.com consumers, with a reliability rating of 4.7 for the 2015 Lancer Evolution versus a reliability rating of 4.6 for the 2006 GTO.

Which is more fuel efficient, the 2015 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution or the 2006 Pontiac GTO?

The 2015 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution is more fuel efficient than the 2006 Pontiac GTO with 19 MPG combined versus 0 MPG combined.

Which car is cheaper, the 2015 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution or the 2006 Pontiac GTO?

The 2006 Pontiac GTO is cheaper than the 2015 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution with a $31,290 starting MSRP versus a $34,495 starting MSRP.

Similar cars for sale

Compare the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution

Compare the Pontiac GTO

Add car