Kia RIO 2000 vs Mazda 3 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 115 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.3 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is a more dynamic driving. Kia RIO engine produces 30 HP less power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 30 NM less than Mazda 3. Due to the lower power, Kia RIO reaches 100 km/h speed 3.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.3 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.5 l/100km | 7.8 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Kia RIO consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Kia RIO could require 15 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Kia RIO consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 610 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 730 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| 520 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 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 Mazda 3 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Mazda Xedos 6, Mazda MX-3, Kia RIO, Kia Cerato, Kia Carens | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.22 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Kia RIO is smaller. Kia RIO is 27 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Kia RIO is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 261 litres | 413 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 675 litres | |
|
Mazda 3 has more luggage space. Kia RIO has 152 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.5 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Kia RIO is 0.8 metres less than that of the Mazda 3, which means Kia RIO can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`409 | 1`675 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Kia RIO has serious deffects in 110 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | no data | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Kia RIO has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |