Mitsubishi Carisma 1995 vs Mazda 3 2003
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
---|---|---|---|
Engines: | 1.6 - 1.9 | 1.3 - 2.3 | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 90 - 140 HP | 84 - 160 HP | |
Torque: | 137 - 265 NM | 122 - 245 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.2 - 15 seconds | 9 - 14.3 seconds | |
Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 - 8.3 | 5.0 - 8.2 | |
Mitsubishi Carisma petrol engines consumes on average 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than Mazda 3. On average, Mitsubishi Carisma equipped with diesel engines consume 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.48 m | 4.45 m | |
Width: | 1.71 m | 1.76 m | |
Height: | 1.40 m | 1.46 m | |
Mitsubishi Carisma is 3 cm longer than the Mazda 3, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Carisma is 6 cm lower. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 440 litres | 481 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1150 litres | 878 litres | |
Despite its longer length, Mitsubishi Carisma has 41 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 3. This could mean that the Mitsubishi Carisma uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Carisma (by 272 litres). | |||
Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.3 meters | |
The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Carisma is 0.1 metres more than that of the Mazda 3. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`696 | ~ 1`728 | |
Safety: | no data | ||
Quality: | average | high | |
Average price (€): | 1000 | 1200 | |
Rating in user reviews: | 7.9/10 | 8.2/10 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Carisma has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |