Citroen C3 2013 vs Mazda 2 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.3 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: | 82 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 116 NM | 119 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.3 seconds | 14.9 seconds | |
|
Citroen C3 is more dynamic to drive. Citroen C3 engine produces 7 HP more power than Mazda 2, but torque is 3 NM less than Mazda 2. Thanks to more power Citroen C3 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.5 | 5.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.2 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km | |
|
By specification Citroen C3 consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2, which means that by driving the Citroen C3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Citroen C3 consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 43 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1110 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 1280 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| 800 km with real consumption | 710 km with real consumption | ||
| Citroen C3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 370'000 km | 330'000 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 Citroen C3 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Peugeot 308, Citroen C1, Peugeot 2008, Opel Crossland | Used also on Mazda 3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Citroen C3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Mazda 2 2010 1.3 engine: The engine is generally robust, but the use of poor-quality fuel can lead to increased burn formation. Idling speeds tend to be unstable. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.94 m | 3.92 m | |
| Width: | 1.73 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Citroen C3 is larger. Citroen C3 is 2 cm longer than the Mazda 2, 3 cm wider, while the height of Citroen C3 is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | 250 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 787 litres | |
|
Citroen C3 has more luggage capacity. Citroen C3 has 50 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 2. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen C3 is 0.4 metres more than that of the Mazda 2. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`511 | 1`485 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Mazda 2 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen C3 has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Mazda 2, so Mazda 2 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7800 | 3600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen C3 has
|
Mazda 2 has
| |