ASX 2.0L GLX (2WD) Mid Option vs Defender 90 SE (P300) Comparison
Car Information
Engine / Motor
193 km/h
191 km/h
/
4
/
GCC
Dimensions
5 Seater
5 Seater
4355 mm
4583 mm
1810 mm
2008 mm
1625 mm
1969 mm
2670 mm
2587 mm
358 L
397 L
/
5 Doors
Fuel Economy
12.5 Km/L
10 Km/L
63 L
88 L
12.5 Km/L
10 Km/L
Comfort
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Safety
✓
/
Chassis & Steering
Front Wheel Drive
All Wheel Drive
Key Spec
2.0 L - 2.0 L
2.0 L - 5 L
150 - 150
300 BHP - 635
Automatic & CVT
8-speed ZF automatic transmission & Automatic
Gasoline & Petrol
Gasoline
TBD
TBD
5 - 5
5 - 8 Seater
Exterior
✓
/
Engine
2.0 L
2.0 L
Gasoline
Gasoline
150 BHP
300 BHP
197 Nm
400 Nm
/
V
/
Single Turbo
Comparison of configuration highlights
ASX 2.0L GLX (2WD) Mid Option
- Parking sensor rear
- Parking sensor front
- Rear Camera
- ABS
Defender 90 SE (P300)
Review Comparison
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Related comparisons
Editor's PickASX 2.0L GLX (2WD) Mid Option
Expert / Editor Recommendation
Choose ASX 2.0L GLX (2WD) Mid Option if you care more about price; choose Defender 90 SE (P300) if you care more about power.
Popular Car Comparisons
Q&A
- According to fuel consumption data, ASX 2.0L GLX (2WD) Mid Option has a fuel consumption of 8, while Defender 90 SE (P300) has a fuel consumption of 10. Therefore, ASX 2.0L GLX (2WD) Mid Option is more fuel-efficient.
- In terms of interior space, ASX 2.0L GLX (2WD) Mid Option has a wheelbase of 2670 mm, while Defender 90 SE (P300) has a wheelbase of 2587 mm. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, ASX 2.0L GLX (2WD) Mid Option, offers more room.
- Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. ASX 2.0L GLX (2WD) Mid Option uses Front Wheel Drive, while Defender 90 SE (P300) uses All Wheel Drive.