Mazda CX-3 2015 vs Honda HR-V 2015
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 270 NM | 300 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 10.1 seconds | |
|
Honda HR-V is a more dynamic driving. Mazda CX-3 engine produces 15 HP less power than Honda HR-V, whereas torque is 30 NM less than Honda HR-V. Due to the lower power, Mazda CX-3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.7 | 4.0 | |
|
The Honda HR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda CX-3 consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda HR-V, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda CX-3 could require 105 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 44 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 930 km in combined cycle | 1250 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 1310 km on highway | ||
| Honda HR-V 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) | 170 mm (6.7 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Honda HR-V 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 Honda HR-V version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 330'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda 3, Mazda 2 | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda CX-3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mazda CX-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: | 4.28 m | 4.30 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.61 m | |
|
Mazda CX-3 is smaller. Mazda CX-3 is 2 cm shorter than the Honda HR-V, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda CX-3 is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 350 litres | 393 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1260 litres | 1456 litres | |
|
Honda HR-V has more luggage space. Mazda CX-3 has 43 litres less trunk space than the Honda HR-V. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Honda HR-V (by 196 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda CX-3 is 0.8 metres less than that of the Honda HR-V, which means Mazda CX-3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`800 | 1`870 | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Honda HR-V scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | high | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 14 000 | 16 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-3 has
|
Honda HR-V has
| |