Mazda CX-3 2018 vs Nissan Juke 2019
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 117 HP | |
| Torque: | 207 NM | 180 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 11.1 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-3 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda CX-3 engine produces 33 HP more power than Nissan Juke, whereas torque is 27 NM more than Nissan Juke. Thanks to more power Mazda CX-3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | no data | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 44 litres | 46 litres | |
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 | 300'000 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: | 13 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 Nissan Micra | |
| 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. | |||
| Mazda CX-3 2018 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 2018 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.28 m | 4.14 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.54 m | 1.57 m | |
| Mazda CX-3 is 14 cm longer than the Nissan Juke, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda CX-3 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 350 litres | 354 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1260 litres | 422 litres | |
| Mazda CX-3 has 4 litres less trunk space than the Nissan Juke. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-3 (by 838 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 Juke. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`808 | 1`700 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | average | |
| Mazda CX-3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Juke has serious deffects in 65 percent more cases than Mazda CX-3, so Mazda CX-3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 17 000 | 18 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-3 has
|
| |