Volkswagen T-Roc 2017 vs Mazda CX-3 2018
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 190 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 207 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.2 seconds | 8.8 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen T-Roc is more dynamic to drive. Volkswagen T-Roc engine produces 40 HP more power than Mazda CX-3, whereas torque is 113 NM more than Mazda CX-3. Thanks to more power Volkswagen T-Roc reaches 100 km/h speed 1.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 7.0 | |
| Volkswagen T-Roc consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-3, which means that by driving the Volkswagen T-Roc over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 44 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 620 km in combined cycle | |
| 870 km on highway | 720 km on highway | ||
| Volkswagen T-Roc 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) | |
| Mazda CX-3 2018 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 2018 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.23 m | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.57 m | 1.54 m | |
| Volkswagen T-Roc is 4 cm shorter than the Mazda CX-3, 5 cm wider, while the height of Volkswagen T-Roc is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 445 litres | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1237 litres | 1260 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Volkswagen T-Roc has 95 litres more trunk space than the Mazda CX-3. 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 23 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen T-Roc is 0.5 metres more than that of the Mazda CX-3, which means Volkswagen T-Roc can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`990 | 1`773 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | high | |
| Volkswagen T-Roc has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda CX-3 has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Volkswagen T-Roc, so Volkswagen T-Roc quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 18 600 | 14 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen T-Roc has
|
Mazda CX-3 has
| |