DETAILED CAR COMPARISON

2016 Mitsubishi ASX vs 2016 Mazda CX-3 Comparison

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

VS
WINNER

Mitsubishi ASX

Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points.

71.25–70.5
SPECIFICATION GROUPS

Every difference between the two cars

Basic Specifications

MitsubishiMakeMazda
ASXModelCX-3
2016Model year2016
SUVBody typeSUV
5Seats5
5Doors5

Performance

—0–100 km/h8,7 s
194 km/hTop speed200 km/h
1998 ccEngine displacement1998 cc
150 HPPower150 HP
197 NmTorque204 Nm
4Cylinders4

Fuel & Consumption

PetrolFuel typePetrol
60 ltFuel tank44 lt
10,1 ltUrban consumption8,1 lt
6,3 ltExtra-urban consumption5,5 lt
7,7 ltAverage consumption6,4 lt

Transmission & Chassis

Front-wheel driveDrivetrain4x4
5Gears6
215/65 R16; 215/60 R17Tyre size—
YesABSYes

Dimensions

4295 mmLength4275 mm
1770 mmWidth1765 mm
1625 mmHeight1535 mm
1360 KgWeight1235 Kg
2670 mmWheelbase2570 mm

E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note

2016 Mitsubishi ASX and 2016 Mazda CX-3 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, Mitsubishi ASX 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…