Mazda 3 2013 vs Citroen C4 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 104 HP | 95 HP | |
| Torque: | 144 NM | 135 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13 seconds | 11.9 seconds | |
| Mazda 3 engine produces 9 HP more power than Citroen C4, whereas torque is 9 NM more than Citroen C4. Despite the higher power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 6.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 6.8 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen C4 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C4, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda 3 consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C4. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 860 km in combined cycle | 980 km in combined cycle | |
| 710 km with real consumption | 880 km with real consumption | ||
| Citroen C4 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 16 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Citroen C3, 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 C4 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: | 4.47 m | 4.33 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.49 m | |
|
Mazda 3 is larger, but slightly lower. Mazda 3 is 14 cm longer than the Citroen C4, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 3 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 364 litres | 380 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1263 litres | 1183 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Mazda 3 has 16 litres less trunk space than the Citroen C4. This could mean that the Mazda 3 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 3 (by 80 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.6 metres less than that of the Citroen C4, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`720 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda 3 scores higher in safety tests. The Citroen C4 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | high | below average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen C4 has serious deffects in 85 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7800 | 4400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Citroen C4 has
| |