Chevrolet Cruze 2012 vs Mazda 3 2011
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 141 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 176 NM | 187 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
| Chevrolet Cruze engine produces 9 HP less power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 11 NM less than Mazda 3. Despite less power, Chevrolet Cruze reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 | 7.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.6 l/100km | 8.4 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Chevrolet Cruze consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that by driving the Chevrolet Cruze over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Chevrolet Cruze consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 620 km with real consumption | 650 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Chevrolet Cruze engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Chevrolet Orlando | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda MX-5, Mazda 5, Mazda CX-5 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Mazda 3 2011 2.0 engine: The engine tends to idle unevenly. Engine problems may also include the thermostat and cooling pump. This engine tends to consume more oil at higher mileages. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.51 m | 4.46 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.47 m | |
|
Chevrolet Cruze is larger. Chevrolet Cruze is 5 cm longer than the Mazda 3, 4 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 413 litres | 340 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1360 litres | |
|
Chevrolet Cruze has more luggage capacity. Chevrolet Cruze has 73 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Cruze is 0.5 metres more than that of the Mazda 3, which means Chevrolet Cruze can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`832 | 1`835 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chevrolet Cruze has serious deffects in 75 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6200 | 5000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Cruze has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |