Mazda 2 2010 vs Citroen C3 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 95 HP | |
| Torque: | 119 NM | 136 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.9 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
Citroen C3 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 2 engine produces 20 HP less power than Citroen C3, whereas torque is 17 NM less than Citroen C3. Due to the lower power, Mazda 2 reaches 100 km/h speed 4.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.0 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 2 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 2 consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C3, which means that by driving the Mazda 2 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 2 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 43 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 760 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda 3 | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Citroen C4, Peugeot 208, Citroen C3 Picasso | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Citroen C3 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| Mazda 2 2010 1.3 engine: The engine is generally robust, but the use of poor-quality fuel can lead to increased burn formation. Idling speeds tend to be unstable. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.92 m | 3.94 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.73 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.52 m | |
|
Mazda 2 is smaller. Mazda 2 is 2 cm shorter than the Citroen C3, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 2 is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 250 litres | 300 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
787 litres | 1000 litres | |
|
Citroen C3 has more luggage space. Mazda 2 has 50 litres less trunk space than the Citroen C3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Citroen C3 (by 213 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 2 is 0.4 metres less than that of the Citroen C3. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`485 | 1`576 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | low | |
| Mazda 2 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen C3 has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than Mazda 2, so Mazda 2 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3600 | 3400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 2 has
|
Citroen C3 has
| |