Mazda 2 2010 vs Mitsubishi Colt 2008
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 1.3 - 1.6 (petrol, diesel) | 1.1 - 1.5 (petrol) | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 - 102 HP | 75 - 109 HP | |
| Torque: | 119 - 205 NM | 100 - 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.7 - 14.9 seconds | 10 - 13.2 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.2 - 6.3 | 5.5 - 6.2 | |
|
Mazda 2 petrol engines consumes on average 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than Mitsubishi Colt. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.92 m | 3.94 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.55 m | |
| Mazda 2 is 2 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Colt, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 2 is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 250 litres | 220 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
787 litres | 1032 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Mazda 2 has 30 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Colt. The Mitsubishi Colt may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Colt (by 245 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 2 is 1 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Colt, which means Mazda 2 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`499 | ~ 1`457 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 3600 | 3200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 2 has
|
Mitsubishi Colt has
| |