Mazda 3 2011 vs Chevrolet Cruze 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 141 HP | |
| Torque: | 187 NM | 176 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 10.1 seconds | |
| Mazda 3 engine produces 9 HP more power than Chevrolet Cruze, whereas torque is 11 NM more than Chevrolet Cruze. Despite the higher power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 6.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 7.7 l/100km | |
|
The Chevrolet Cruze is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Cruze, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 150 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Cruze. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 650 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
| Chevrolet Cruze gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 480'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Chevrolet Cruze engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda MX-5, Mazda 5, Mazda CX-5 | Used also on Chevrolet Orlando | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Mazda 3 2011 2.0 engine: The engine tends to idle unevenly. Engine problems may also include the thermostat and cooling pump. This engine tends to consume more oil at higher mileages. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.46 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Mazda 3 is smaller. Mazda 3 is 5 cm shorter than the Chevrolet Cruze, 4 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 340 litres | 413 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1360 litres | no data | |
|
Chevrolet Cruze has more luggage space. Mazda 3 has 73 litres less trunk space than the Chevrolet Cruze. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.5 metres less than that of the Chevrolet Cruze, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`835 | 1`823 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | below average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chevrolet Cruze has serious deffects in 75 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4800 | 6200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Chevrolet Cruze has
| |