Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross vs SERES 3
Biggest differences: WLTP range — Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross 600 km, SERES 3 300 km · AC charging — Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross 22 kW, SERES 3 11 kW · Boot — Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross 545 l, SERES 3 318 l.
Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross
The Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross Long Range is a compact SUV with front-wheel drive and a long driving range according to the WLTP standard.
SERES 3
The electric SUV belongs to the C-segment and is equipped with front-wheel drive and a 54 kWh battery.
Profile against the market: Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross vs SERES 3
Mitsubishi Eclipse CrossLong Range 87 kWh FWD
SERES 3Standard
Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross or SERES 3 — who wins where
Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross leads 8 to 1
The score leaves out metrics where data is missing on one side.
Click a slice to see only those metrics. Each bar shows where the car stands against the whole catalogue.
- WLTP range kmMitsubishi Eclipse Cross +300 km
- Battery kWhMitsubishi Eclipse Cross +33 kWh
- Consumption ↓ kWh/100 kmMitsubishi Eclipse Cross −0.9 kWh/100 km
- Power PSMitsubishi Eclipse Cross +58 PS
- 0–100 km/h ↓ sMitsubishi Eclipse Cross −0.5 s
- Top speed km/hMitsubishi Eclipse Cross +15 km/h
- DC charging kWNo data
- AC charging kWMitsubishi Eclipse Cross +11 kW
- Charging ↓ minNo data
- Weight ↓ kgSERES 3 −77 kg
- Boot lMitsubishi Eclipse Cross +227 l
Technical data: Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross vs SERES 3
Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data
| Key parameters | Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross Long Range 87 kWh FWD | SERES 3 Standard | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range and energy | |||
| WLTP range | 600 km | 300 km | Mitsubishi +300 km |
| Battery | 87 kWh | 54 kWh | Mitsubishi +33 kWh |
| Consumption ↓ | 16.7 kWh/100 km | 17.6 kWh/100 km | Mitsubishi −0.9 kWh/100 km |
| Charging | |||
| DC charging | 150 kW | — | — |
| AC charging | 22 kW | 11 kW | Mitsubishi +11 kW |
| Charging 10–80% ↓ | 32 min | — | — |
| Range per minute of charging | 13.1 km/min | — | — |
| Voltage | 400 V | — | — |
| Performance and drivetrain | |||
| Power | 218 PS | 160 PS | Mitsubishi +58 PS |
| 0–100 km/h ↓ | 8.4 s | 8.9 s | Mitsubishi −0.5 s |
| Top speed | 170 km/h | 155 km/h | Mitsubishi +15 km/h |
| Drivetrain | FWD | FWD | — |
| Practicality | |||
| Weight ↓ | 1842 kg | 1765 kg | SERES −77 kg |
| Boot | 545 l | 318 l | Mitsubishi +227 l |
| V2L (external power) | Yes | No | only Mitsubishi |
| Length | 4470 mm | 4415 mm | Mitsubishi +55 mm |
| Width | 1864 mm | 1850 mm | Mitsubishi +14 mm |
| Height | 1571 mm | 1650 mm | SERES +79 mm |
| Wheelbase | — | — | — |
The better value in each row is bold and underlined in the colour of the car. Metrics marked ↓ — lower is better. Dimensions are shown without picking a winner.
Energy cost calculator
Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross
SERES 3
Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.
Video reviews of both models
Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross
Other comparisons in this class: SUV, segment C
Frequently asked questions about this comparison
Which has the longer range — Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross or SERES 3?
The Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross goes further: 600 km WLTP against the 300 km of the SERES 3. That is a difference of 300 km.
Which one can power appliances from a socket (V2L)?
Only the Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross — its 87 kWh battery then works as a power source. The SERES 3, with 54 kWh, does not offer it.
Which is more powerful — Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross or SERES 3?
The Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross is stronger: 218 PS against the 160 PS of the SERES 3. The gap is 58 PS.
Which has the bigger boot?
The Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross takes more: 545 l against 318 l in the SERES 3. The difference is 227 l.
Technical data comes from official manufacturer materials and we do our best to verify it, but a manufacturer can change a specification without notice and mistakes do happen. Confirm the figures with a dealer before you buy — we accept no liability for decisions made on the basis of this data. Full disclaimer
Range, consumption and weight are given for the base configuration: manufacturers homologate them as a band of values that depends on wheels and equipment (e.g. 533–592 km), and we take the lightest variant, on the smallest wheels — i.e. the most favourable. The same model on larger wheels will travel a shorter distance.