Toyota C-HR 2016 vs Audi Q3 2014
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Toyota C-HR) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Audi Q3) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 116 HP | 184 HP | |
| Torque: | 185 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.1 seconds | 7.9 seconds | |
|
Audi Q3 is a more dynamic driving. Toyota C-HR engine produces 68 HP less power than Audi Q3, whereas torque is 195 NM less than Audi Q3. Due to the lower power, Toyota C-HR reaches 100 km/h speed 3.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 5.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km | |
|
The Audi Q3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Toyota C-HR consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi Q3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Toyota C-HR could require 120 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Toyota C-HR consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi Q3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 1250 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 1450 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 880 km with real consumption | ||
| Audi Q3 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) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.36 m | 4.39 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.83 m | |
| Height: | 1.56 m | 1.61 m | |
|
Toyota C-HR is smaller. Toyota C-HR is 3 cm shorter than the Audi Q3, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Toyota C-HR is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 377 litres | 460 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1365 litres | |
|
Audi Q3 has more luggage space. Toyota C-HR has 83 litres less trunk space than the Audi Q3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota C-HR is 0.8 metres less than that of the Audi Q3, which means Toyota C-HR can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`865 | 2`225 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | 17 000 | 16 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota C-HR has
|
Audi Q3 has
| |