Mazda CX-3 2014 vs Ford EcoSport 2015
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.5 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Mazda CX-3) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Ford EcoSport) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 95 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 215 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 14 seconds | |
| Mazda CX-3 engine produces 55 HP more power than Ford EcoSport, but torque is 5 NM less than Ford EcoSport. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | no data | 4.4 | |
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | 180 mm (7.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Ford EcoSport can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Ford EcoSport version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
| Mazda CX-3 2014 2.0 engine: This engine is not well-suited for low-quality fuel, as it quickly clogs the fuel system. The use of substandard fuel often leads to the failure of expensive ignition coils, resulting in significant repair ... More about Mazda CX-3 2014 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.28 m | 4.27 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.65 m | |
| Mazda CX-3 and Ford EcoSport are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 350 litres | 333 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1260 litres | 1238 litres | |
| Mazda CX-3 has 17 litres more trunk space than the Ford EcoSport. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-3 (by 22 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`760 | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Mazda CX-3 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Mazda CX-3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford EcoSport has serious deffects in 75 percent more cases than Mazda CX-3, so Mazda CX-3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 200 | 7200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-3 has
|
Ford EcoSport has
| |