Citroen C4 2012 vs Mazda 3 2011
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 116 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 150 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 11 seconds | |
| Citroen C4 engine produces 1 HP more power than Mazda 3, but torque is 120 NM less than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power Citroen C4 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 4.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 5.4 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen C4 consumes 2.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen C4 could require 420 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen C4 consumes 1.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 1270 km in combined cycle | |
| 1030 km on highway | 1440 km on highway | ||
| 820 km with real consumption | 1010 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Citroen C-Elysee, Peugeot 301, Peugeot 408 | Used also on Mazda 5 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Citroen C4 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.62 m | 4.58 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.50 m | 1.47 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Citroen C4 is 4 cm longer than the Mazda 3, 3 cm wider, while the height of Citroen C4 is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 440 litres | 430 litres | |
| Citroen C4 has 10 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`790 | 1`815 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen C4 has serious deffects in 85 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4600 | 5200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen C4 has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |