Jeep Wrangler 2007 vs Mazda CX-3 2015
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.8 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 177 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 410 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.3 seconds | 10.1 seconds | |
| Jeep Wrangler engine produces 72 HP more power than Mazda CX-3, whereas torque is 140 NM more than Mazda CX-3. Despite the higher power, Jeep Wrangler reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.7 | 4.0 | |
|
The Mazda CX-3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Jeep Wrangler consumes 5.7 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 855 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 66 litres | 48 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 1200 km in combined cycle | |
| 800 km on highway | 1260 km on highway | ||
| Mazda CX-3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| 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) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 330'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Jeep Wrangler engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Chrysler Grand Voyager, Jeep Cherokee, Dodge Nitro | 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. Jeep Wrangler might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.22 m | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | 1.87 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.80 m | 1.55 m | |
| Jeep Wrangler is 5 cm shorter than the Mazda CX-3, 11 cm wider, while the height of Jeep Wrangler is 25 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 141 litres | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1260 litres | |
|
Mazda CX-3 has more luggage space. Jeep Wrangler has 209 litres less trunk space than the Mazda CX-3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Wrangler is 0.2 metres less than that of the Mazda CX-3. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`500 | 1`735 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | 22 600 | 11 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Wrangler has
|
Mazda CX-3 has
| |