Mitsubishi Colt 2004 vs Mazda 2 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.4 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 95 HP | 68 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 160 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 15 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 27 HP more power than Mazda 2, whereas torque is 50 NM more than Mazda 2. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 5.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.6 | 4.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.4 l/100km | 5.3 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Colt could require 15 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1020 km in combined cycle | 1000 km in combined cycle | |
| 1140 km on highway | 1120 km on highway | ||
| 870 km with real consumption | 840 km with real consumption | ||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.87 m | 3.92 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.54 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mitsubishi Colt is 5 cm shorter than the Mazda 2, 2 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | 267 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
760 litres | 1044 litres | |
|
Mazda 2 has more luggage space. Mitsubishi Colt has 47 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 2. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 2 (by 284 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 1 metres more than that of the Mazda 2, which means Mitsubishi Colt can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`545 | 1`530 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | high | |
| Mazda 2 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Colt has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Mazda 2, so Mazda 2 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 1600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Mazda 2 has
| |