Compare two cars

Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion

Car #1
Make
Model
Variant
Engine
Car #2
Make
Model
Variant
Engine

compare selected cars
2017. - 2019.
J - SUV
suv, 5 door
front
Badges
Production
Vehicle class
Body style
Wheel drive
Safety
2015. - 2018.
J - SUV
suv, 5 door
front

Dimensons & Outlines

4122 mm
1778 mm
1556 mm
455 liters
1235 liters
45 liters
Length
Width
Height
Boot (min)
Boot (max)
Fuel tank
4275 mm
1765 mm
1535 mm
350 liters
1260 liters
48 liters
2017 Renault Captur
2015 Mazda CX-3

Check a car with 30% off a report

Engine

Petrol
4 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Turbo
1332 cc
130 hp
240 Nm
Engine
Fuel
Configuration
Aspiration
Displacement
Power
Torque
Petrol
4 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Nat. Asp.
1998 cc
120 hp
210 Nm

Performance (manual gearbox)

manual gearbox - 6 gears
1251 kg
10.2 s
200 km/h
7.1 l/100km
4.8 l/100km
5.6 l/100km
128 g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
manual gearbox - 6 gears
1230 kg
9.0 s
192 km/h
7.4 l/100km
4.9 l/100km
5.9 l/100km
137 g/km

Performance (automatic gearbox)

 
kg
s
km/h
l/100km
l/100km
l/100km
g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
automatic - 6 gears
1270 kg
9.9 s
187 km/h
7.3 l/100km
4.9 l/100km
5.8 l/100km
136 g/km

Expenses

11800 EUR
Price from
13200 EUR

Virtual Adviser's™ opinion

Overview

Well, these are two pretty similar cars we have here! It's only details that could potentially make the difference. Considering they both belong to the suv segment and utilize the same 5-door suv body style and the front wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific petrol engine choice they offer. The first one has a Nissan-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 130hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 120hp engine designed by Mazda.

Safety

A starting point here would be to take a look at the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests which were performed on both of the cars, with the Renault being a slightly better choice apparently. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. Both vehicles belong to the suv segment, which is generally a very good thing safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the French car offers a marginal difference of 2% more metal.

Reliability

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, all the models observed together. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Renault with an average rating of 4.2, and models under the Mazda badge with 4.4 out of 5. Unfortunatelly, I don't have enough insight that would allow me to comment in more details on the specific models level. Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the French car rank it on average as 4.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.

Performance & Fuel economy

Mazda is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.2 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 192 kilometers per hour, 8km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 5.8 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (49 mpg), in combined cycle.


Verdict

Mazda appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In my opinion, everything taken into account, the French car offers much better overall protection, which launches it ahead of the other contender. From there things take a different direction, with Mazda offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... I believe that, when we take all into account, we have only one winner here - the Renault. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. In case you have two minutes to spare I invite you to define your needs, desires and budget and see which car would be chosen by the virtual adviser, among more than 12.000 different ones in our database.

Follow us

AutoManiac Instagram

AutoManiac Facebook

AutoManiac database currently covers:

47worldwide automotive brands
1.613different vehicle models
2.331engines
14.590specific cars