Skoda Karoq 2017 vs Mazda CX-30 2019
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 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: | 150 HP | 180 HP | |
| Torque: | 250 NM | 224 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.6 seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
|
Skoda Karoq is more dynamic to drive. Skoda Karoq engine produces 30 HP less power than Mazda CX-30, but torque is 26 NM more than Mazda CX-30. Despite less power, Skoda Karoq reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 | 5.6 | |
| Skoda Karoq consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-30, which means that by driving the Skoda Karoq over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 48 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 900 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 1020 km on highway | 940 km on highway | ||
| Skoda Karoq gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 176 mm (6.9 inches) | 175 mm (6.9 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 330'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Skoda Octavia, Audi A3, Skoda Superb, Skoda Scala, Audi A1, Audi Q3 | Used also on Mazda 3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Skoda Karoq might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Skoda Karoq 2017 1.5 engine: The engine is praised for being both flexible and torquey, delivering impressive performance for its horsepower rating. It is also remarkably fuel-efficient. However, the engine is very demanding when it comes ... More about Skoda Karoq 2017 1.5 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.38 m | 4.40 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.61 m | 1.56 m | |
| Skoda Karoq is 1 cm shorter than the Mazda CX-30, 5 cm wider, while the height of Skoda Karoq is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 521 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1630 litres | 1406 litres | |
|
Skoda Karoq has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Skoda Karoq has 91 litres more trunk space than the Mazda CX-30. The Mazda CX-30 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 Skoda Karoq (by 224 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Karoq is 0.5 metres less than that of the Mazda CX-30, which means Skoda Karoq can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`929 | 2`070 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 18 200 | 21 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Karoq has
|
Mazda CX-30 has
| |