Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross vs Škoda Elroq
Biggest differences: AC charging — Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross 22 kW, Škoda Elroq 11 kW · Power — Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross 218 PS, Škoda Elroq 286 PS · 0–100 km/h — Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross 8.4 s, Škoda Elroq 6.6 s.
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.
Škoda Elroq
The Škoda Elroq is a compact SUV in the C-segment, offering rear-wheel drive or all-wheel drive options, and power outputs ranging from 170 to 340 horsepower.
Profile against the market: Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross vs Škoda Elroq
Mitsubishi Eclipse CrossLong Range 87 kWh FWD
Škoda Elroq85
Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross or Škoda Elroq — who wins where
Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross leads 6 to 5
Click a slice to see only those metrics. Each bar shows where the car stands against the whole catalogue.
- WLTP range kmMitsubishi Eclipse Cross +27 km
- Battery kWhMitsubishi Eclipse Cross +10 kWh
- Consumption ↓ kWh/100 kmŠkoda Elroq −1.5 kWh/100 km
- Power PSŠkoda Elroq +68 PS
- 0–100 km/h ↓ sŠkoda Elroq −1.8 s
- Top speed km/hŠkoda Elroq +10 km/h
- DC charging kWMitsubishi Eclipse Cross +15 kW
- AC charging kWMitsubishi Eclipse Cross +11 kW
- Charging ↓ minŠkoda Elroq −4 min
- Weight ↓ kgMitsubishi Eclipse Cross −208 kg
- Boot lMitsubishi Eclipse Cross +75 l
Technical data: Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross vs Škoda Elroq
Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data
| Key parameters | Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross Long Range 87 kWh FWD | Škoda Elroq 85 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range and energy | |||
| WLTP range | 600 km | 573 km | Mitsubishi +27 km |
| Battery | 87 kWh | 77 kWh | Mitsubishi +10 kWh |
| Consumption ↓ | 16.7 kWh/100 km | 15.2 kWh/100 km | Škoda −1.5 kWh/100 km |
| Charging | |||
| DC charging | 150 kW | 135 kW | Mitsubishi +15 kW |
| AC charging | 22 kW | 11 kW | Mitsubishi +11 kW |
| Charging 10–80% ↓ | 32 min | 28 min | Škoda −4 min |
| Range per minute of charging | 13.1 km/min | 14.3 km/min | Škoda +1.2 km/min |
| Voltage | 400 V | 400 V | No difference |
| Performance and drivetrain | |||
| Power | 218 PS | 286 PS | Škoda +68 PS |
| 0–100 km/h ↓ | 8.4 s | 6.6 s | Škoda −1.8 s |
| Top speed | 170 km/h | 180 km/h | Škoda +10 km/h |
| Drivetrain | FWD | RWD | different type |
| Practicality | |||
| Weight ↓ | 1842 kg | 2050 kg | Mitsubishi −208 kg |
| Boot | 545 l | 470 l | Mitsubishi +75 l |
| V2L (external power) | Yes | No | only Mitsubishi |
| Length | 4470 mm | 4488 mm | Škoda +18 mm |
| Width | 1864 mm | 1884 mm | Škoda +20 mm |
| Height | 1571 mm | 1625 mm | Škoda +54 mm |
| Wheelbase | — | 2765 mm | — |
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
Škoda Elroq
Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.
Video reviews of both models
Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross
Škoda Elroq
Other comparisons in this class: SUV, segment C
Frequently asked questions about this comparison
Which has the longer range — Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross or Škoda Elroq?
The Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross goes further: 600 km WLTP against the 573 km of the Škoda Elroq. That is a difference of 27 km.
How do the drivetrains of the Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross and the Škoda Elroq differ?
The Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross has FWD and 218 PS. The Škoda Elroq has RWD and 286 PS.
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 Škoda Elroq, with 77 kWh, does not offer it.
Which has the bigger boot?
The Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross takes more: 545 l against 470 l in the Škoda Elroq. The difference is 75 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.