Mitsubishi Colt 2008 vs Mazda 2 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 95 HP | 103 HP | |
| Torque: | 125 NM | 137 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
Mazda 2 is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 8 HP less power than Mazda 2, whereas torque is 12 NM less than Mazda 2. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.5 l/100km | 7.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.1 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 15 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 43 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 970 km on highway | 870 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Colt gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 390'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mazda 2 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 21 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Smart ForFour | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Colt might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.88 m | 3.90 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is smaller, but slightly higher. Mitsubishi Colt is 2 cm shorter than the Mazda 2, width is practically the same , while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | 250 litres | |
|
Mazda 2 has more luggage space. Mitsubishi Colt has 30 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 2. | |||
| 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`430 | 1`485 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 2 has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2800 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Mazda 2 has
| |