Toyota Celica 1994 vs Mazda MX-3 1991
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 116 HP | 135 HP | |
| Torque: | 154 NM | 160 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 seconds | 8.5 seconds | |
|
Mazda MX-3 is a more dynamic driving. Toyota Celica engine produces 19 HP less power than Mazda MX-3, whereas torque is 6 NM less than Mazda MX-3. Due to the lower power, Toyota Celica reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.9 | 9.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.2 l/100km | 9.5 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Celica is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Toyota Celica consumes 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda MX-3, which means that by driving the Toyota Celica over 15,000 km in a year you can save 165 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Toyota Celica consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda MX-3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 550 km in combined cycle | |
| 930 km on highway | 700 km on highway | ||
| 730 km with real consumption | 520 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota Celica gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Corolla, Toyota Carina E | 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. Toyota Celica might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mazda MX-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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.42 m | 4.22 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.30 m | 1.31 m | |
|
Toyota Celica is larger, but slightly lower. Toyota Celica is 20 cm longer than the Mazda MX-3, 5 cm wider, while the height of Toyota Celica is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 283 litres | 289 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota Celica is 0.6 metres more than that of the Mazda MX-3, which means Toyota Celica can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`510 kg | 1`450 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`170 kg | 1`125 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 340 kg | 325 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 3200 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Celica has
|
Mazda MX-3 has
| |