Jeep Wrangler 2017 vs Mazda CX-3 2018
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 270 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 207 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
| Jeep Wrangler engine produces 120 HP more power than Mazda CX-3, whereas torque is 193 NM more than Mazda CX-3. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.8 | 6.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.4 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda CX-3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Jeep Wrangler consumes 3.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jeep Wrangler could require 465 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Jeep Wrangler consumes 4.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 44 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 650 km in combined cycle | |
| 740 km on highway | 720 km on highway | ||
| 560 km with real consumption | 570 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 246 mm (9.7 inches) | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Jeep Wrangler 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. | |||
| Mazda CX-3 2018 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-3 2018 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.24 m | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.87 m | 1.54 m | |
| Jeep Wrangler is 4 cm shorter than the Mazda CX-3, 11 cm wider, while the height of Jeep Wrangler is 33 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 203 litres | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
508 litres | 1260 litres | |
|
Mazda CX-3 has more luggage space. Jeep Wrangler has 147 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 752 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Wrangler is 0.1 metres less than that of the Mazda CX-3. | |||
| Gross weight: | no data | 1`808 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | 39 600 | 15 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Wrangler has
|
Mazda CX-3 has
| |