Mitsubishi Carisma 1996 vs Mazda 3 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 116 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 162 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Carisma is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Carisma engine produces 11 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 17 NM more than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Carisma reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 7.8 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mitsubishi Carisma consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Carisma over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mitsubishi Carisma consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 890 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 1110 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| 750 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Carisma gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Mazda 3 2003 1.6 engine: This engine is widely regarded as reliable, though it can develop certain issues over time. One of the most common problems is increased oil consumption, often starting after 120,000 km. This is frequently ... More about Mazda 3 2003 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.42 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.46 m | |
| Mitsubishi Carisma is 6 cm longer than the Mazda 3, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Carisma is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 300 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
660 litres | 635 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi Carisma has more luggage capacity. Mitsubishi Carisma has 130 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Carisma (by 25 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.3 meters | |
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`660 | 1`695 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Carisma has serious deffects in 755 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.9/10 | 8.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Carisma has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |