Mazda CX-3 2015 vs Nissan Qashqai 2013
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
| 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: | 105 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 270 NM | 260 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 11.9 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-3 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda CX-3 engine produces 5 HP less power than Nissan Qashqai, but torque is 10 NM more than Nissan Qashqai. Despite less power, Mazda CX-3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.7 | no data | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 44 litres | 55 litres | |
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) | 180 mm (7.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Nissan Qashqai 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 Nissan Qashqai version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. Choose from two 4x4 versions of Nissan Qashqai 2013 if off-road driveability is important to you. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda 3, Mazda 2 | Installed on at least 22 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster, Nissan Juke | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Qashqai 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 | 4.38 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.59 m | |
|
Mazda CX-3 is smaller. Mazda CX-3 is 10 cm shorter than the Nissan Qashqai, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda CX-3 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 350 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1260 litres | 1585 litres | |
|
Nissan Qashqai has more luggage space. Mazda CX-3 has 80 litres less trunk space than the Nissan Qashqai. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Qashqai (by 325 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda CX-3 is 0.1 metres less than that of the Nissan Qashqai. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`800 | 1`910 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Nissan Qashqai is better rated in child safety tests. The Nissan Qashqai scores 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 Nissan Qashqai has serious deffects in 125 percent more cases than Mazda CX-3, so Mazda CX-3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 14 000 | 10 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-3 has
|
Nissan Qashqai has
| |