Mazda CX-3 2018 vs Peugeot 2008 2019
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
| 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: | 150 HP | 155 HP | |
| Torque: | 207 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 8.2 seconds | |
|
Peugeot 2008 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda CX-3 engine produces 5 HP less power than Peugeot 2008, whereas torque is 33 NM less than Peugeot 2008. Due to the lower power, Mazda CX-3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 5.0 | |
|
The Peugeot 2008 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda CX-3 consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Peugeot 2008, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda CX-3 could require 255 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 44 litres | 41 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 810 km in combined cycle | |
| 720 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| Peugeot 2008 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 provides 98% of power to the front under normal conditions and can shift up to 50% of torque to the rear if wheels slip. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mazda CX-3 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3, Mazda MX-5, Mazda CX-5 | Used also on Citroen C4 | |
| 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: | 1.54 m | 1.53 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda CX-3 is 3 cm shorter than the Peugeot 2008, width is practically the same also the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 350 litres | 434 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1260 litres | 1467 litres | |
|
Peugeot 2008 has more luggage space. Mazda CX-3 has 84 litres less trunk space than the Peugeot 2008. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Peugeot 2008 (by 207 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda CX-3 is 0.2 metres more than that of the Peugeot 2008. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`808 | 1`748 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | below average | |
| Mazda CX-3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Peugeot 2008 has serious deffects in 110 percent more cases than Mazda CX-3, so Mazda CX-3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 18 600 | 20 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-3 has
|
Peugeot 2008 has
| |