Mazda 2 2003 vs Mitsubishi Colt 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 100 HP | 109 HP | |
| Torque: | 146 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.4 seconds | 10 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 2 engine produces 9 HP less power than Mitsubishi Colt, but torque is 1 NM more than Mitsubishi Colt. Due to the lower power, Mazda 2 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 6.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.7 l/100km | 6.7 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 2 consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 2 could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 2 consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 630 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 770 km on highway | 920 km on highway | ||
| 580 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Colt gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.92 m | 3.87 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.54 m | 1.55 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 2 is 5 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Colt, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 2 is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 267 litres | 220 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1044 litres | 760 litres | |
|
Mazda 2 has more luggage capacity. Mazda 2 has 47 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Colt. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 2 (by 284 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`515 | 1`440 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | high | |
| Mazda 2 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Colt has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Mazda 2, so Mazda 2 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 1600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 2 has
|
Mitsubishi Colt has
| |