Mitsubishi ASX 2012 vs Mazda CX-3 2015
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 117 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 154 NM | 204 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.4 seconds | 9 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-3 is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi ASX engine produces 3 HP less power than Mazda CX-3, whereas torque is 50 NM less than Mazda CX-3. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi ASX reaches 100 km/h speed 2.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 5.9 | |
| Mitsubishi ASX consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-3, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi ASX over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 48 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1080 km in combined cycle | 810 km in combined cycle | |
| 1280 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| Mitsubishi ASX gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 190 mm (7.5 inches) | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mitsubishi ASX 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. Note, however, that this Mitsubishi ASX version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. Choose from seven 4x4 versions of Mitsubishi ASX 2012 if off-road driveability is important to you. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.30 m | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.62 m | 1.55 m | |
|
Mitsubishi ASX is larger. Mitsubishi ASX is 2 cm longer than the Mazda CX-3, width is practically the same , while the height of Mitsubishi ASX is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 442 litres | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1219 litres | 1260 litres | |
| Mitsubishi ASX has 92 litres more trunk space than the Mazda CX-3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-3 (by 41 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`870 | 1`690 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | high | |
| Mazda CX-3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi ASX has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Mazda CX-3, so Mazda CX-3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 000 | 12 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi ASX has
|
Mazda CX-3 has
| |