Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross vs Mitsubishi Triton

What's the difference?

The Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross Plug-in Hybrid EV is an interesting inclusion for the brand, especially as it is typically considered a ‘value player’ in the market.

But with negligible real-world fuel consumption benefits if you drive beyond the limited EV range and a high price premium over the non-PHEV models, it’s important you see if the sums add up for your particular needs.

Primarily going to use the car for running around town? Cool. Think the 50-ish-kay EV range will work for you and make you happy? Amazing. Sold on the look of the car? Hat tipped.

But let me say this - if you are considering the Eclipse Cross PHEV, there are some alternatives you should also have on your list, including the MG HS PHEV, the Hyundai Ioniq PHEV, Kia Niro PHEV, and - the one I’d buy - a Toyota RAV4 Hybrid. For me, plug-in hybrid tech is a bit of a halfway house, in most instances offering too high a price premium for the range you’re getting to drive electric. Heck, a Kona Electric isn’t much more than the top-spec Exceed PHEV, and I’d have that if I wanted a real day-to-day EV experience.

Apart from its distracting driver attention monitor, we can't see any major flaws that would detract from this vehicle’s comfort, practicality and performance when serving as either a utilitarian 4x4 workhorse or back-to-basics 4x4 dual cab for adventures off the beaten track.

You’re going to be able to tell the PHEV model from its more conventional counterparts by those oversized ‘Plug-in Hybrid EV’ badges on the front doors, and if you want to tell those behind you what you’re driving, there’s also a ‘PHEV’ badge there, too. Wait, wasn’t the plan to do away with the term ‘PHEV’, Mitsubishi? 

But aside from that, the outside features just the different 18-inch alloy wheels (which are the same on all PHEV models, no matter the cost - I think that’s a bit lame, because if I’m spending $7500 on the Exceed I’d like a different wheel design!). Oh, and the Aspire and Exceed get that different lower front splitter, too.

Plus the PHEV has two fuel filler doors - one on each side of the car over the rear wheels. The driver’s side one is the EV charging ports (x2 - detailed below), and the passenger’s side one is for the petrol. Note: while the EV port is push-openable, the petrol cap still requires you to lift a lever in the driver’s footwell. 

It may be categorised a small SUV but at 4545mm long, riding on a 2670mm wheelbase, 1805mm wide and 1685mm tall, it’s big for its boots. The popular Mazda CX-5 is only 5mm longer, and it plays in the midsize SUV segment!

Inside there are some design differences, with a specific gear joystick-style selector, and a different instrument panel.

It is impressive how the brand has managed to shoehorn a petrol engine, two electric motors, a battery pack and more into the car, but there are some practicality implications. Read about them in the next section.

Our test vehicle rides on a compact 3130mm wheelbase and is 1865mm wide and 1795mm tall, which combined with a 12.4-metre turning circle makes it agile and easy to manoeuvre both on and off-road.

Speaking of which, its all-terrain credentials include 228mm of ground clearance, a useful 30.4 degrees approach angle (without bull-bar) and 23.4 degrees ramp breakover angle, with the departure angle dependent on the type of tray fitted. These numbers would be more than adequate for accessing rugged worksites.

Its front suspension is double-wishbone with coil-springs, paired with a robust leaf-spring live rear axle. Brakes are front discs and rear drums and it has electric power-assistance for the rack and pinion steering.

Looks are subjective of course but we reckon it has a robust and purposeful appearance in cab-chassis form, particularly with the accessories fitted to our example.

Chrome is all but extinct in its predominantly grey interior. However, hard surfaces on the centre console and door-pulls have a synthetic carbon-fibre finish, which adds a touch of style to a low-maintenance cabin that won’t get trashed by spilled coffee or muddy boots.

You also won’t find fancy features like digital instruments (it has analogue speedo/tacho) or an electronic handbrake (this one’s the good old manual lever). Plus there’s physical dials for audio volume/tuning and ‘piano key’ buttons for the cabin’s climate control, which ensures no distracting touchscreen prompts when driving.

Up front, the cabin is a pretty smart place, with nice enough materials and finishes, and a few good storage options. There’s a cubby in front of the shifter, but oddly enough it doesn’t have a wireless charger (there are 2x USB 2.0 ports above) and isn’t quite big enough for a smartphone (even the smaller ones don’t fit there all that easily), and there are cup holders between the seats, a decent covered centre console bin, and door pockets large enough for bottles.

The PHEV models get a different instrument cluster dial for EV driving readout info, but all have the old-school 4.2-inch TFT colour display that lacks the size and usability of some rivals with larger info screens - the MG HS PHEV, for instance, has a 12.3-inch digital display, which shows you a lot more info than this tiny little screen does. Heck, there’s not even a digital speedometer in there - and you only get one if you buy the Exceed model, which has a head-up display (HUD).

That’s part of the problem with the way this car’s interface operates. If you want the most detailed information you need to use the touchscreen media system, but that negates the usability of the media functions. On multiple occasions I found myself switching between Apple CarPlay phone calls and searching for that particular driving info screen I found most useful (there are about 15 screens to choose from, and plenty of them are hard to decipher).

It’s a huge disappointment for a customer who might want to see all that detailed information but also listen to a podcast, answer a call, follow their phone’s mapping or just have anything other than the hybrid info come up on the infotainment screen. The screen itself - an 8.0-inch unit, with sat nav integrated into the top spec only - is fine, but small compared to today’s rivals.

In the back seat, there’s a compromise for cabin space. The leg room is good, but the seat has been bumped up to accommodate some of the electrical hardware and the petrol tank, meaning someone my size (182cm/6’0”) will find they’ve got enough room for their legs but not their head, and those even larger will really need to take care getting in and out. While pre-facelift examples of this car had a clever sliding second row seat, that’s gone. It was never a feature in any PHEV version, and undoubtedly the layout of the battery pack has something to do with that. 

The double pane sunroof no doubt eats into the space in the rear to a degree as well, and in the Exceed it likely feels a bit more cramped because of the black headliner. 

While three adults could potentially fit across the back row for very short trips, there are dual ISOFIX and three top-tether points for child seats. The Exceed is the one you want if you’re aiming to treat your rear-seat passengers right: it has heated rear outboard seats, rear directional air vents and two USB ports for charging - the ES and Aspire miss out on all that stuff.  

Boot space is 359L (VDA) for PHEV models, which is a step down from the 405 litres (VDA) for the non-hybrid models. There is extra hardware under the floor, and you don’t get a spare wheel in the PHEV models either - instead there’s a tyre repair kit. For context, we only just managed to fit all three CarsGuide hard suitcases (124L, 95L and 36L) in the boot of the PHEV version, while it was far less of an issue in the non-PHEV.

Oddly, no model comes with a power tailgate. 

With a kerb weight of only 1993kg (without tray) and 3200kg GVM, our test vehicle has a 1207kg payload rating. However, after you add the combined weight of its steel tray and other accessories (417kg), the payload rating is reduced by the same amount to 790kg. Even so, that still leaves a sizeable weight capacity for up to five tradies and their tools.

It’s also rated to tow up to 3500kg of braked trailer but with its 6250kg GCM (or how much it can legally carry and tow at the same time) the payload would have to be reduced by 450kg (from 790kg to 340kg) to avoid exceeding the GCM.

In real-world use it’s unlikely that many (if any) Triton owners would need to tow 3500kg but it’s important to be across these numbers to avoid overloading, which is dangerous and illegal.

The genuine accessory galvanised steel tray is internally 1650mm long and 1780mm wide. It has a robust checker-plate floor and a tube-frame front bulkhead with sturdy wire-mesh rear window protection.

There’s also swing-up load retainers on top of the tube-frame on each side, which when paired with the matching rear tube-rack accessory provides secure carrying space for extension ladders or long lengths of timber and PVC pipe/conduit.

There’s also external rope/strap rails along each side but like all steel trays we’ve come across there’s no internal load-anchorage points.

The driver and front passenger have access to a bottle holder and storage bin in each front door plus an overhead glasses holder and a large open compartment above the glovebox. The centre console offers more open storage plus two bottle/cupholders in the centre and a usefully-sized box at the back with a lid that doubles as a driver’s elbow rest.

The rear bench seat is comfortable and surprisingly spacious for tall people, given I’m 186cm and when seated behind the driver’s seat when set in my position, I have about 40mm of kneeroom and 60mm of headroom.

There’s also adequate head clearance for those seated in the slightly higher centre position, but the floor’s prominent transmission tunnel requires one boot either side and knees together between the front seat backrests.

And like all dual-cab utes short of a full-size US pick-up, rear shoulder room is squeezy for three adults, which is tolerable for short trips but a maximum of two adults would be ideal for longer drives.

Rear seat storage includes a bottle-holder and bin in each door plus pockets on each front seat backrest. The centre seat’s backrest also folds forward to serve as an armrest with dual bottle/cup-holders.

The bench seat’s base cushion is fixed, so unlike numerous rivals it can’t swing up and be stored vertically if more internal carrying space is required.

The Triton’s cab-chassis list pricing (without tray) starts at $34,490 for the GLX single-cab 4x2 manual and finishes at $61,540 for the premium GSR dual-cab 4x4 auto.

Our GLX test vehicle comes standard with a 2.4-litre twin-turbo four-cylinder diesel engine (shared by all Tritons) and optional six-speed automatic for $49,490. This pricing is competitive with base-model 4x4 dual-cab-chassis equivalents like the Toyota HiLux Workmate ($48,735), Ford Ranger XL ($49,230) and Isuzu D-Max SX ($51,200).

However, our example is loaded with numerous items from Mitsubishi’s genuine accessories range including a steel tray ($5775), rear ladder rack ($951.42), steel bull-bar ($4755), driving lights ($1295), side-steps ($1750) and 3500kg towing kit/electronic brake controller ($2370).

This desirable ensemble adds almost $17,000 to the price, which with on-road costs would be nudging $70K to drive away. So, buyers must keep their budgets in mind, as it’s easy to get carried away in genuine accessory lolly shops.

Our test vehicle comes standard with 17-inch steel wheels and 265/65R17 all-terrain tyres plus a full-size spare. It also has heavy-duty rear suspension and underbody armour, front/rear parking sensors, reversing camera, tyre-pressure monitoring and more.

The work-focused cabin has wipe-clean fabric seat trim and vinyl floors, power-adjustable driver’s lumbar support, twin 12-volt accessory sockets and USB ports, 7.0-inch driver’s instrument cluster and a four-speaker audio system controlled by a 9.0-inch multimedia screen with Android Auto, Apple CarPlay and Bluetooth connectivity.

The plug-in hybrid version runs a non-turbocharged 2.4-litre Atkinson cycle petrol engine producing just 94kW and 199Nm.

Meagre outputs, but the petrol unit is backed by two electric motors - the front motor has outputs of 60kW/137Nm, while the rear motor produces 70kW/195Nm. It’s all controlled by a single-speed transmission.

There is no ‘combined power output’ figure, but there is a 13.8kWh lithium-ion battery pack as part of the equation as well.

The engine can power the battery pack in series hybrid driving mode, so if you want to top up the batteries before you get to a city, you can. And there is regenerative braking, of course. More on recharging in the next section.

The Triton’s 2.4-litre four-cylinder diesel engine is equipped with two turbochargers that work in sequence to boost efficiency, with the smaller one providing fast response at low rpm and the larger one optimising performance at higher rpm. The result is 150kW of power at 3500rpm and torque peaking at 470Nm between 1500-2750rpm, using AdBlue to minimise emissions.

It’s paired with a six-speed torque converter automatic that offers the choice of sequential manual shifting, which can be preferable when hauling and/or towing heavy loads, particularly in hilly terrain.

The 4x4 system is dual-range, part-time offering 2H (2WD High Range), 4H (4WD High Range) and 4L (4WD Low Range) controlled by a dial on the centre console. However, you need to step up to the GLX+ to get a rear diff-lock.

The Eclipse Cross PHEV has an official combined cycle fuel consumption figure of 1.9L/100km. That’s astounding, really, but you need to realise that the test calculation is only for the first 100 kays - there’s a really good chance your real-world consumption will be a lot higher, as you can only deplete the battery charge once before calling on the engine (and your petrol tank) to juice it back up.

Electric driving range is stated at 55km based on NEDC cycle testing, while the WLTP rating is a more realistic 45km. In our testing we fell between the two during our “fully charged” 100km run, in which the electric charge initially ran for 50km. But, over the 100km run, the dashboard info screen said the car used “82 per cent” electric driving, while somehow also showing 3.9L/100km for petrol consumption.

I did the numbers at the fuel filler, and the actual return was 4.5L/100km. That’s okay, but not nearly as spectacular as you might hope, and I’ve seen very close in a RAV4 hybrid - which in most instances is cheaper than the Eclipse Cross despite being bigger and, frankly, a lot better.

I also ran the car for a further 100 kays without plugging in, just to see what the ‘worst case scenario’ might be - and it wasn’t too bad, with the fuel consumption jumping to a real-world return of 5.5L/100km. But again, that’s worse than you’ll likely get with a RAV4…

When it comes to charging/recharging, there is available AC charging using a Type 2 plug that can fully recharge the battery in as little as 3.5 hours, according to the brand. DC fast charging with a CHAdeMO plug should fill from zero to 80 per cent in 25 minutes. Maximum charge input is 3.6kW.

Like me, you’ll want to do the maths to see what is going to be the most economical way to run your car - aside from just plugging it in at the office and hoping nobody notices.

A standard 10-amp household plug - which should take about seven hours to replenish the batteries - could cost as little as $1.88 to get back your circa-50km EV range - that’s based on overnight charging, off-peak, on an average 13.6c/kWh electricity price. Of course, if you’re considering a PHEV, you might have a solar array and the electricity could well be free. Good for you.

But remember, there’s more to it than just the electricity costs - you need to also consider the additional purchase budget required just to get into the PHEV model over a regular Eclipse Cross. 

Mitsubishi claims official combined average consumption of 7.7L/100km but the dash display was showing 9.9 at the completion of our 316km test, which included the usual mix of suburban, city and highway driving of which about one third of that distance was hauling its maximum payload.

Our own consumption figure, calculated from fuel bowser and tripmeter readings, came in higher again at 10.7L/100km which is on the borderline of the usual 2-3L/100km discrepancy between manufacturer claims and real-world consumption.

So, based on our own numbers, the test vehicle should have a real-world driving range of around 700km from its 75-litre tank.

If you’re after that electric car thrill of near-silent, almost mind-blowing acceleration, the Eclipse Cross mightn’t be the right car for you

But if swift progress and the buzz you get from taking off from the traffic lights without any hesitation at all is more your thing, it could be great for you. And if you’re not quite ready to go “full EV”, then it’s probably something you’re considering.

The EV driving mode is the best driving mode in this car. You can run it just on the petrol engine to ensure you save your battery range, and you might choose to do that when you’re driving on the freeway and know you’re approaching an urban area where the EV goodness will be better used. Or you could have it so it's using battery and petrol power, and that’s where you’ll get maximum combined performance.

But running the car in the default, EV-prioritised mode means you will make the best of this powertrain's strengths, because - for the fifty odd kays you’ll get out of the battery - it’s pretty good.

It’s also impressive the way this powertrain dips between petrol engine, battery pack or both at higher speeds. When the battery range had depleted on my test drive, the engine kicked in almost imperceptibly, working to power the car and also generate more electricity for the battery pack. It then dipped out of petrol, back to battery, and so on and so forth, multiple times during my drive. 

The best thing about the way it did so was that it was smooth. There is barely any vibration from the petrol engine, the transmission doesn’t have any gears to fumble with, and overall the refinement is really good.

There are drive modes - Eco, Normal, Snow, Gravel and Tarmac - and in my test I kept to Normal. I did fiddle with the regenerative braking reactiveness, though, using the paddleshifters to dial up or down the aggressiveness of the energy recoup system. It doesn’t feel as aggressive as some pure electric cars, but thankfully it has a decent pedal feel and progression when you apply the brakes yourself. 

The steering is light and lacks feel, and doesn’t offer that much engagement or involvement. That might matter to you if you’re like me. I wish it was more fun. But at least it’s easy to park.

While the suspension is fine and comfortable on the highway, it can feel wooden and the ride is quite lumpy at low speeds. It never really feels all that well resolved for urban driving, which is a bit of a downer considering that’s likely where a car like this will spend most of its time

The tune of the suspension - being a bit firm at lower pace - surprisingly doesn’t have any payoff when it comes to cornering, as it lacks a bit of body control, shifting its weight side to side. 

All in all it is a decent plug-in hybrid offering – and will be perfectly suitable to someone who wants some EV driving as a part of their lifestyle. It’s just a matter of doing the maths as to whether it will work for you.

Large assist-handles on the A (and B) pillars, combined with the accessory side-steps on our example, make it easy to climb aboard and find a comfortable driving position.

The unladen ride is firm, as you’d expect given its 6.0-tonne-plus GCM rating, but it’s still supple enough to soak up the bumps without the harsh kidney-belting ride suffered in some cab-chassis one-tonners we’ve tested.

This is no doubt helped by the accessories fitted, which provide more than 400kg of additional sprung weight to engage the heavy-duty rear springs and improve the ride quality. That’s something to keep in mind if you often drive unladen.

The steering is firmly weighted and the brakes have good response, with the rear drums offering a terrier-like bite when the manual handbrake is applied on steep hills with a heavy load on board.

The four-cylinder 2.4-litre diesel, with its sequential turbocharging and strong outputs, provides energetic all-round performance with efficient gearing that ensures its operating within its peak torque band most of the time.

However, at highway speeds it does tend to hold top gear for too long, when the engine has dropped below 1500rpm and is clearly wanting a downshift.

To test its payload rating, we strapped 650kg on the tray which when combined with accessories and crew was right on the weight limit. The stout rear springs compressed only 25mm under this load, leaving ample bump-stop clearance that assured there was no bottoming-out on our test route.

The Triton handled this task with competence, maintaining good performance and chassis stability. It easily hauled this load up our 13 per cent gradient, 2.0km set climb at 60km/h, with the six-speed auto self-shifting down to third gear and 2500rpm which was comfortably within its peak torque band. Engine braking on the way down was also commendable.

Our only gripe is the driver distraction monitoring system which is still too reactive in certain situations, like scratching an itch below my eye even though I was looking straight ahead while doing it. Even though Mitsubishi has tried to improve this system, it needs more refinement, as it detracts from an otherwise positive driving experience.

The Triton comes with a five-star ANCAP rating (tested 2024) and a suite of passive and active features highlighted by eight airbags (including side-curtains), auto emergency braking (AEB) with pedestrian/cyclist detection and junction assist, rear AEB when reversing, front/rear cross-traffic alert, traffic sign recognition, adaptive cruise control, lane-keeping, front/rear parking sensors, reversing camera, trailer stability assist and lots more. Rear seat has ISOFIX child-seat anchorages on the two outer rear seating positions and three top-tethers.

There’s a huge 10 year/200,000 kilometre warranty on offer - but it’s valid if you maintain your car with Mitsubishi’s dedicated dealer service network over the 10 years/200,000km timeline, or else you get a five-year/100,000km plan.

But while the rest of the car will be covered by that decade-long warranty if you service it with Mitsubishi, the battery is only covered for eight years/160,000km, no matter where you have the car serviced.

Maintenance is due every 12 months/15,000km. But just a note - the more complex powertrain means higher service costs than the regular turbo-petrol versions. The annual fees are: $299, $399, $299, $399, $299, $799, $299, $799, $399, $799; so an average cost of $339 for the first five years, or $558.90 per visit over 10 years/150,000kn. 

Included for customers who service their car with the brand is four years of roadside assist.

Do you have questions over reliability, issues, concerns, recalls, automatic transmission problems, or anything else of that ilk? Check out our Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross problems page.

It comes with a five-year/100,000km standard warranty, or 10 years/200,000km if serviced at Mitsubishi dealers.

Scheduled servicing is every 12 months/15,000km whichever occurs first. Pricing is capped at $6860 for 10 scheduled services up to 10 years/150,000km, or an average of $686 per service.

Mitsubishi currently has more than 200 dealers across its national network that spans metro, rural and regional areas. Mitsubishi dealerships are also service centres.