MU X 3.0T Standard (4x2) vs EHS3 EV 153 hp (FWD) Comparison
Car Information
Engine / Motor
/
160 km/h
Dimensions
7 Seater
5 Seater
4850 mm
4490 mm
1870 mm
1874 mm
1875 mm
1613 mm
2855 mm
2750 mm
235 L
/
Fuel Economy
80 L
/
Comfort
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
Interior
/
✓
Safety
/
✓
Chassis & Steering
Rear Wheel Drive
Front Wheel Drive
Key Spec
2.5 L - 3.0 L
/
136 BHP - 190 BHP
153 BHP - 305 BHP
Automatic & Manual
TBD
Diesel & Petrol
Electric
TBD
/
7 - 7
5 Seater
/
TBD
/
TBD
Exterior
✓
✓
/
✓
Engine
3.0 L
/
Diesel
Electric
190 BHP
153 BHP
450 Nm
340 Nm
Comparison of configuration highlights
MU X 3.0T Standard (4x2)
- Parking sensor rear
- Parking sensor front
EHS3 EV 153 hp (FWD)
- Parking sensor rear
- Parking sensor front
- Rear Camera
- ABS
Review Comparison
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Related comparisons
Editor's PickEHS3 EV 153 hp (FWD)
Expert / Editor Recommendation
Choose MU X 3.0T Standard (4x2) if you care more about interior space; choose EHS3 EV 153 hp (FWD) if you care more about power.
Popular Car Comparisons
Q&A
- According to fuel consumption data, MU X 3.0T Standard (4x2) has a fuel consumption of No data, while EHS3 EV 153 hp (FWD) has a fuel consumption of No data. Therefore, No data is more fuel-efficient.
- In terms of interior space, MU X 3.0T Standard (4x2) has a wheelbase of 2855 mm, while EHS3 EV 153 hp (FWD) has a wheelbase of 2750 mm. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, MU X 3.0T Standard (4x2), offers more room.
- Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. MU X 3.0T Standard (4x2) uses Rear Wheel Drive, while EHS3 EV 153 hp (FWD) uses Front Wheel Drive.