Mazda MX-3 1991 vs Nissan 200 SX 1994
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 135 HP | 200 HP | |
| Torque: | 160 NM | 265 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 seconds | 7.5 seconds | |
|
Nissan 200 SX is a more dynamic driving. Mazda MX-3 engine produces 65 HP less power than Nissan 200 SX, whereas torque is 105 NM less than Nissan 200 SX. Due to the lower power, Mazda MX-3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.0 | 8.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.5 l/100km | 10.5 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda MX-3 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Mazda MX-3 consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan 200 SX, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda MX-3 could require 30 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda MX-3 consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan 200 SX. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 550 km in combined cycle | 730 km in combined cycle | |
| 520 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan 200 SX gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Mazda MX-3) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Nissan 200 SX) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.22 m | 4.52 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.73 m | |
| Height: | 1.31 m | 1.30 m | |
|
Mazda MX-3 is smaller, but slightly higher. Mazda MX-3 is 30 cm shorter than the Nissan 200 SX, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda MX-3 is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 289 litres | 307 litres | |
| Mazda MX-3 has 18 litres less trunk space than the Nissan 200 SX. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 9.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda MX-3 is 0.2 metres more than that of the Nissan 200 SX. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`450 | 1`780 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Nissan 200 SX has
| |