Citroen C3 2010 vs Mazda 2 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Diesel | 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: | 70 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 160 NM | 119 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 16 seconds | 14 seconds | |
|
Mazda 2 is a more dynamic driving. Citroen C3 engine produces 5 HP less power than Mazda 2, but torque is 41 NM more than Mazda 2. Due to the lower power, Citroen C3 reaches 100 km/h speed 2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.4 | 5.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.2 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen C3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen C3 consumes 0.7 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 105 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen C3 consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 43 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1130 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 1310 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| 960 km with real consumption | 710 km with real consumption | ||
| Citroen C3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 400'000 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: | 6 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | 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. Mazda 2 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Citroen C3 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| 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 |
1000 litres | no data | |
|
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`564 | 1`455 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Mazda 2 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen C3 has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than Mazda 2, so Mazda 2 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3400 | 4400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen C3 has
|
Mazda 2 has
| |