Ford EcoSport 2015 vs Mazda CX-3 2015
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 95 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 215 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14 seconds | 10.1 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-3 is a more dynamic driving. Ford EcoSport engine produces 10 HP less power than Mazda CX-3, whereas torque is 55 NM less than Mazda CX-3. Due to the lower power, Ford EcoSport reaches 100 km/h speed 3.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.4 | 4.0 | |
|
The Mazda CX-3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Ford EcoSport consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford EcoSport could require 60 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 48 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1180 km in combined cycle | 1200 km in combined cycle | |
| 1200 km on highway | 1260 km on highway | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 180 mm (7.1 inches) | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Ford EcoSport can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Ford EcoSport version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.27 m | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.65 m | 1.55 m | |
| Ford EcoSport and Mazda CX-3 are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 333 litres | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1238 litres | 1260 litres | |
| Ford EcoSport has 17 litres less trunk space than the Mazda CX-3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-3 (by 22 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`760 | 1`735 | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Mazda CX-3 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Mazda CX-3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford EcoSport has serious deffects in 75 percent more cases than Mazda CX-3, so Mazda CX-3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7200 | 11 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford EcoSport has
|
Mazda CX-3 has
| |