Mazda CX-30 2019 vs Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2018
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 116 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 270 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.6 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is a more dynamic driving. Mazda CX-30 engine produces 34 HP less power than Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, whereas torque is 110 NM less than Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. Due to the lower power, Mazda CX-30 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.0 | 5.6 | |
|
The Mazda CX-30 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda CX-30 consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, which means that by driving the Mazda CX-30 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1010 km in combined cycle | 1160 km in combined cycle | |
| 1060 km on highway | 1270 km on highway | ||
| Land Rover Range Rover Evoque gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2018 2.0 engine: This engine is known for its relatively limited lifespan. In early production models, balance shaft bearings wore out quickly and started making noise. The chain-driven timing system, located on the flywheel ... More about Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2018 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.40 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.56 m | 1.65 m | |
| Mazda CX-30 is 2 cm longer than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, 11 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda CX-30 is 9 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 591 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1406 litres | no data | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mazda CX-30 has 161 litres less trunk space than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. This could mean that the Mazda CX-30 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda CX-30 is 0.2 metres less than that of the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`969 | 2`490 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 23 400 | 34 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-30 has
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has
| |