Mazda 3 2013 vs Mazda CX-3 2014
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Body: | Hatchback | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Mazda 3 is available only with front wheel drive, while Mazda CX-3 can be equipped with front wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive. | |||
| Engines: | 1.5 - 2.5 | 1.5 - 2.0 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 100 - 187 HP | 105 - 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 144 - 380 NM | 204 - 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.1 - 13.6 seconds | 8.7 - 11.9 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.1 - 7.6 | 4.0 - 6.4 | |
|
Mazda 3 petrol engines consumes on average 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than Mazda CX-3. On average, Mazda 3 equipped with diesel engines consume 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-3. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.47 m | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.55 m | |
|
Mazda 3 is larger, but lower. Mazda 3 is 20 cm longer than the Mazda CX-3, 2 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 3 is 10 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 364 litres | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1263 litres | 1260 litres | |
| Mazda 3 has 14 litres more trunk space than the Mazda CX-3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 3 (by 3 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`864 | ~ 1`814 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda 3 scores higher in safety tests, but Mazda CX-3 is better rated in child safety tests. The Mazda 3 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Average price (€): | 7200 | 11 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Mazda CX-3 has
| |