Mazda CX-30 2019 vs Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2023
| Comparing electrical vehicle (EV) with combustion engine (ICE) one is a complex task, but we are doing our best. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 1.8 Diesel | 2.0 Hybrid | |
| Diesel (Mazda CX-30) engines offer better fuel efficiency on highways and deliver high torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy-duty use. Hybrid (Land Rover Range Rover Evoque) engines, however, are more fuel efficient in city traffic and produce lower emissions, especially during low-speed or stop-and-go conditions. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 116 HP | 249 HP | |
| Torque: | 270 NM | 365 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.6 seconds | 7.6 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is a more dynamic driving. Mazda CX-30 engine produces 133 HP less power than Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, whereas torque is 95 NM less than Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. Due to the lower power, Mazda CX-30 reaches 100 km/h speed 5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Consumption: | 5.0 l/100km | 7.7 l/100km | |
| Fuel cost per 100km: | 9.30 € | no data | |
|
Change fuel prices per unit to adjust the calculation to the fuel prices in your country. Diesel€/l | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 67 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1010 km in combined cycle | 870 km in combined cycle | |
| Mazda CX-30 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) | |
| Ground clearance: | 175 mm (6.9 inches) | 212 mm (8.3 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.40 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | no data | |
| Height: | 1.56 m | 1.65 m | |
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 591 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1406 litres | 1383 litres | |
| Mazda CX-30 has 161 litres less trunk space than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-30 (by 23 litres). | |||
| 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: | 1`969 kg | 2`430 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`371 kg | 1`818 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 598 kg | 612 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 21 200 | 43 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-30 has
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has
| |