Honda HR-V 2015 vs Mazda CX-3 2015
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 120 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 300 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.1 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Honda HR-V is more dynamic to drive. Honda HR-V engine produces 15 HP more power than Mazda CX-3, whereas torque is 30 NM more than Mazda CX-3. Thanks to more power Honda HR-V reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.0 | 4.7 | |
|
The Honda HR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Honda HR-V consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-3, which means that by driving the Honda HR-V over 15,000 km in a year you can save 105 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 44 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1250 km in combined cycle | 930 km in combined cycle | |
| 1310 km on highway | 950 km on highway | ||
| Honda HR-V gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Mazda CX-3 2014: AWD system delivers 98 percent of power to the front wheels under normal conditions, and up to 50 percent of torque can be shifted to the rear wheels in the event of wheel slip. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 170 mm (6.7 inches) | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Honda HR-V 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 Honda HR-V version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 330'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Mazda 3, Mazda 2 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda CX-3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mazda CX-3 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.30 m | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.61 m | 1.55 m | |
|
Honda HR-V is larger. Honda HR-V is 2 cm longer than the Mazda CX-3, width is practically the same , while the height of Honda HR-V is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 393 litres | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1456 litres | 1260 litres | |
|
Honda HR-V has more luggage capacity. Honda HR-V has 43 litres more trunk space than the Mazda CX-3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Honda HR-V (by 196 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda HR-V is 0.8 metres more than that of the Mazda CX-3, which means Honda HR-V can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`870 | 1`800 | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Honda HR-V scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | 16 600 | 14 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda HR-V has
|
Mazda CX-3 has
| |