Mitsubishi Lancer 2004 vs Mazda 3 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 135 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 176 NM | 187 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 9 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Lancer engine produces 15 HP less power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 11 NM less than Mazda 3. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Lancer reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.4 | 8.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 8.5 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mitsubishi Lancer consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Lancer could require 30 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Lancer consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 590 km in combined cycle | 670 km in combined cycle | |
| 760 km on highway | 870 km on highway | ||
| 580 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 520'000 km | 420'000 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 Mitsubishi Lancer engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 45 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mitsubishi Outlander, Mitsubishi Space Wagon | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda MX-5, Mazda 5, Mazda CX-5 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Lancer might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mitsubishi Lancer engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| Mazda 3 2003 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: | 4.48 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Lancer is smaller. Mitsubishi Lancer is 1 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Lancer is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 413 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 675 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Mitsubishi Lancer has 17 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. The Mazda 3 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.3 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`750 | 1`725 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.7/10 | 8.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Lancer has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |