Mazda CX-5 2017 vs Audi Q3 2019
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Mazda CX-5) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Audi Q3) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 155 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 196 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
| Mazda CX-5 engine produces 5 HP more power than Audi Q3, but torque is 144 NM less than Audi Q3. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 5.4 | |
|
The Audi Q3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda CX-5 consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi Q3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda CX-5 could require 225 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 56 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 1110 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 1300 km on highway | ||
| Audi Q3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Mazda CX-5 2017 2.0 engine: The engine tends to idle unevenly. Engine problems may also include the thermostat and cooling pump. This engine tends to consume more oil at higher mileages. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.55 m | 4.50 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.56 m | |
| Mazda CX-5 is 5 cm longer than the Audi Q3, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda CX-5 is 12 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 477 litres | 530 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1620 litres | 530 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, This could mean that the Mazda CX-5 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-5 (by 1090 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda CX-5 is 0.8 metres less than that of the Audi Q3, which means Mazda CX-5 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`025 kg | 2`155 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`559 kg | 1`580 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 466 kg | 575 kg | |
| Mazda CX-5 load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 23 procentiem less than Audi Q3. Therefore, Audi Q3 is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Audi Q3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda CX-5 has serious deffects in 95 percent more cases than Audi Q3, so Audi Q3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 21 600 | 30 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda CX-5 has
|
Audi Q3 has
| |