2016 • Volvo
V90
Volvo V90 2.0 D3 (150 Hp) 2016Overall Score69.75/100
2016 Volvo V90 vs 2016 Mazda CX-3 Comparison
Compare technical specifications, scores and everyday-use differences side by side.
2016 • Mazda
CX-3
Mazda CX-3 2.0i (150 Hp) 2016Overall Score70.5/100
WINNER
Mazda CX-3
Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points.
69.75–70.5
SPECIFICATION GROUPS
Every difference between the two cars
Basic Specifications
Volvo V90SpecificationMazda CX-3
VolvoMakeMazda
V90ModelCX-3
2016Model year2016
EstateBody typeSUV
5Seats5
5Doors5
Performance
Volvo V90SpecificationMazda CX-3
10,2 s0–100 km/h8,7 s
205 km/hTop speed200 km/h
1969 ccEngine displacement1998 cc
150 HPPower150 HP
320 NmTorque204 Nm
4Cylinders4
Fuel & Consumption
Volvo V90SpecificationMazda CX-3
DieselFuel typePetrol
55 ltFuel tank44 lt
—Urban consumption8,1 lt
—Extra-urban consumption5,5 lt
4,5 ltAverage consumption6,4 lt
Transmission & Chassis
Dimensions
Volvo V90SpecificationMazda CX-3
4936 mmLength4275 mm
1879 mmWidth1765 mm
1475 mmHeight1535 mm
—Weight1235 Kg
2941 mmWheelbase2570 mm
E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note
2016 Volvo V90 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, 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.
VS
VS
VS
VSComments are loading…