Mazda 3 2003 vs Mitsubishi Carisma 2001
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 102 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 215 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 11.9 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 3 engine produces 3 HP more power than Mitsubishi Carisma, but torque is 70 NM less than Mitsubishi Carisma. Thanks to more power Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Carisma is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Carisma, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 255 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Carisma. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 1090 km in combined cycle | |
| 910 km on highway | 1330 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 1000 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Carisma gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 16 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Mazda Xedos 6, Mazda MX-3, Kia RIO, Kia Cerato, Kia Carens | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volvo V40, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Volvo S40 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mazda 3 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.42 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.40 m | |
| Mazda 3 is 6 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Carisma, 5 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 3 is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
635 litres | 1050 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi Carisma has more luggage space. Mazda 3 has 130 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Carisma. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Carisma (by 415 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.1 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Carisma. | |||
| Power steering: | Electric power steering | Hydraulic power steering | |
| Electric power steering is simpler, quieter, more fuel-efficient, more configurable and provides additional features such as auto-steering for lane assist and parking. The disadvantages of electric power steering are possible overheating under prolonged load conditions and insufficient feedback (feeling) during steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`695 | 1`795 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Carisma has serious deffects in 115 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.2/10 | 7.9/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Mitsubishi Carisma has
| |