Opel Crossland 2020 vs Mazda CX-3 2018
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.8 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 120 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 300 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.5 seconds | 11 seconds | |
| Opel Crossland engine produces 5 HP more power than Mazda CX-3, whereas torque is 30 NM more than Mazda CX-3. Despite the higher power, Opel Crossland reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.4 | 4.9 | |
|
The Opel Crossland is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Opel Crossland consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-3, which means that by driving the Opel Crossland over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 48 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1020 km in combined cycle | 970 km in combined cycle | |
| 1180 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 360'000 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 Opel Crossland engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Opel Insignia, Citroen C4 Cactus, Citroen C3 Aircross | 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. Opel Crossland might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.22 m | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | no data | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.61 m | 1.54 m | |
| Trunk capacity: | 410 litres | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1255 litres | 1260 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, The Mazda CX-3 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-3 (by 5 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Opel Crossland is 0.6 metres more than that of the Mazda CX-3, which means Opel Crossland can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`855 kg | 1`780 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`286 kg | 1`261 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 569 kg | 519 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | 11 200 | 14 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Opel Crossland has
|
Mazda CX-3 has
| |