Mazda CX-3 2014 vs Mazda 3 2013
| Body: | Crossover / SUV | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 208 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 9 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda CX-3 and Mazda 3 have the same engine power, but Mazda CX-3 torque is 2 NM less than Mazda 3. Mazda CX-3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.3 | 6.2 | |
| Mazda CX-3 consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda CX-3 could require 15 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 44 litres | 51 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 820 km in combined cycle | |
| 800 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| Mazda 3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
|
Mazda CX-3 has 4x4: AWD system delivers 98 percent of power to the front wheels under normal conditions, and up to 50 percent of torque can be shifted to the rear wheels in the event of wheel slip. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 12 years | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.28 m | 4.47 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Mazda CX-3 is smaller, but higher. Mazda CX-3 is 19 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda CX-3 is 10 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 350 litres | 364 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1260 litres | 1263 litres | |
| Mazda CX-3 has 14 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 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): | 2`070 | 1`835 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda 3 scores higher in safety tests. The Mazda 3 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | high | average | |
| Mazda CX-3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 3 has serious deffects in 95 percent more cases than Mazda CX-3, so Mazda CX-3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 14 000 | 7800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-3 has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |