Mitsubishi Colt 2004 vs Mazda 2 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 109 HP | 80 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 124 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 13.9 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 29 HP more power than Mazda 2, whereas torque is 21 NM more than Mazda 2. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 3.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.2 | 6.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.7 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Colt over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 920 km on highway | 840 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 600 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Colt gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.87 m | 3.92 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.54 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mitsubishi Colt is 5 cm shorter than the Mazda 2, 2 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | 267 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
760 litres | 1044 litres | |
|
Mazda 2 has more luggage space. Mitsubishi Colt has 47 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 2. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 2 (by 284 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 1 metres more than that of the Mazda 2, which means Mitsubishi Colt can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`440 | 1`495 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | high | |
| Mazda 2 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Colt has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Mazda 2, so Mazda 2 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 1400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Mazda 2 has
| |