Suzuki Vitara 2015 vs Mazda CX-3 2014
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 117 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 156 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 8.7 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-3 is a more dynamic driving. Suzuki Vitara engine produces 33 HP less power than Mazda CX-3, whereas torque is 54 NM less than Mazda CX-3. Due to the lower power, Suzuki Vitara reaches 100 km/h speed 3.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 | 6.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km | |
|
The Suzuki Vitara is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Suzuki Vitara consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-3, which means that by driving the Suzuki Vitara over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Suzuki Vitara consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 44 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 920 km on highway | 800 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 600 km with real consumption | ||
| Suzuki Vitara 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: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 185 mm (7.3 inches) | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Suzuki Vitara can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 25 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Suzuki Grand Vitara, Suzuki Swift, Suzuki SX4, Suzuki Liana | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3, Mazda MX-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. Suzuki Vitara might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mazda CX-3 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. | |||
| Suzuki Vitara 2015 1.6 engine: A simple and robust engine, not particularly demanding in terms of fuel quality.
High engine timing chain lifetime.
Tends to increase oil consumption, head gasket failures may occur. Mazda CX-3 2014 2.0 engine: This engine is not well-suited for low-quality fuel, as it quickly clogs the fuel system. The use of substandard fuel often leads to the failure of expensive ignition coils, resulting in significant repair ... More about Mazda CX-3 2014 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.18 m | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.61 m | 1.55 m | |
| Suzuki Vitara is 10 cm shorter than the Mazda CX-3, 1 cm wider, while the height of Suzuki Vitara is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 375 litres | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
710 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 550 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki Vitara is 0.2 metres less than that of the Mazda CX-3. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`730 kg | 1`860 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`160 kg | 1`235 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 570 kg | 625 kg | |
| Suzuki Vitara load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 10 procentiem less than Mazda CX-3. Therefore, Mazda CX-3 is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | |||
| Suzuki Vitara is better rated in child safety tests. The Suzuki Vitara scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Mazda CX-3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Suzuki Vitara has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Mazda CX-3, so Mazda CX-3 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 000 | 11 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki Vitara has
|
Mazda CX-3 has
| |