DETAILED CAR COMPARISON

2016 Mazda CX-3 vs 2016 Great Wall Steed Comparison

Compare technical specifications, scores and everyday-use differences side by side.

VS
WINNER

Mazda CX-3

Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points.

65.25–64.5
SPECIFICATION GROUPS

Every difference between the two cars

Basic Specifications

MazdaMakeGreat Wall
CX-3ModelSteed
2016Model year2016
SUVBody typePick-up
5Seats5
5Doors4

Performance

9,0 s0–100 km/h12,7 s
192 km/hTop speed160 km/h
1998 ccEngine displacement1996 cc
120 HPPower139 HP
204 NmTorque305 Nm
4Cylinders4

Fuel & Consumption

PetrolFuel typeDiesel
48 ltFuel tank70 lt
7,4 ltUrban consumption—
4,9 ltExtra-urban consumption—
5,9 ltAverage consumption8,6 lt

Transmission & Chassis

Front-wheel driveDrivetrain4x4
6Gears6
—Tyre size235/70 R16
YesABSYes

Dimensions

4275 mmLength5040 mm
1765 mmWidth1800 mm
1535 mmHeight1730 mm
1155 KgWeight—
2570 mmWheelbase3050 mm

E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note

2016 Mazda CX-3 and 2016 Great Wall Steed approach the same decision from different angles. We compare the exact versions so changes in engine, transmission, dimensions and equipment are not hidden behind the model names.

Overall, Mazda CX-3 leads the E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points. The score provides a consistent summary, while the best choice can still change with priorities such as urban efficiency, luggage space, performance or equipment.

SIMILAR COMPARISONS

Similar comparisons

Explore related comparisons featuring cars from this matchup.

Comments are loading…