Chevrolet Colorado 2004 vs Mazda BT-50 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.8 Petrol | 2.5 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 177 HP | 143 HP | |
| Torque: | 250 NM | 330 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 12.5 seconds | |
| Chevrolet Colorado engine produces 34 HP more power than Mazda BT-50, but torque is 80 NM less than Mazda BT-50. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.3 | 8.9 | |
|
The Mazda BT-50 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Chevrolet Colorado consumes 2.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda BT-50, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chevrolet Colorado could require 360 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 72 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 630 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 700 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| Mazda BT-50 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.26 m | 5.08 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.66 m | 1.76 m | |
| Chevrolet Colorado is 19 cm longer than the Mazda BT-50, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Chevrolet Colorado is 10 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 645 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 12.5 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 3`030 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 8400 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Colorado has
|
Mazda BT-50 has
| |