Moskvitch 412 1967 vs Mazda CX-3 2015
| Body: | Sedan | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 108 NM | 204 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 19 seconds | 9 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-3 is a more dynamic driving. Moskvitch 412 engine produces 45 HP less power than Mazda CX-3, whereas torque is 96 NM less than Mazda CX-3. Due to the lower power, Moskvitch 412 reaches 100 km/h speed 10 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | no data | 5.9 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 48 litres | |
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | no data | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | 1.55 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.55 m | |
| Trunk capacity: | 350 litres | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1260 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`520 | 1`690 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 11 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Mazda CX-3 has
| |