Jeep Wrangler 2007 vs Mazda CX-3 2014
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.8 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 199 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 315 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Jeep Wrangler engine produces 49 HP more power than Mazda CX-3, whereas torque is 105 NM more than Mazda CX-3. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.6 | no data | |
| 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: | 520'000 km | 420'000 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: | 21 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Dodge Grand Caravan, Chrysler Pacifica | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3, Mazda MX-5, Mazda CX-5 | |
| 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 2014 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 2014 2.0 engine | |||
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`268 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | 22 800 | 11 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Wrangler has
|
Mazda CX-3 has
| |