Citroen C3 2020 vs Mazda CX-5 2012
| Body: | Hatchback | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Citroen C3) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Mazda CX-5) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 102 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 250 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-5 is a more dynamic driving. Citroen C3 engine produces 48 HP less power than Mazda CX-5, but torque is 40 NM more than Mazda CX-5. Due to the lower power, Citroen C3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 3.2 | 6.2 | |
|
The Citroen C3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Citroen C3 consumes 3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-5, which means that by driving the Citroen C3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 450 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 42 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1310 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 1400 km on highway | 1050 km on highway | ||
| Citroen C3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Mazda CX-5 2012 2.0 engine: This engine is not well-suited for low-quality fuel, as it quickly clogs the fuel system. The use of substandard fuel often leads to the failure of expensive ignition coils, resulting in significant repair ... More about Mazda CX-5 2012 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.00 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.67 m | |
|
Citroen C3 is smaller. Citroen C3 is 54 cm shorter than the Mazda CX-5, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Citroen C3 is 20 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | 463 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1620 litres | |
|
Mazda CX-5 has more luggage space. Citroen C3 has 163 litres less trunk space than the Mazda CX-5. | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 11.2 meters | |
| Gross weight: | 1`645 kg | 1`945 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`086 kg | 1`411 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 559 kg | 534 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 14 200 | 7200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen C3 has
|
Mazda CX-5 has
| |