1995 Mazda MX-3 vs. 2010 Citroen C-Crosser
To start off, 2010 Citroen C-Crosser is newer by 15 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1995 Mazda MX-3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1995 Mazda MX-3 would be higher. At 2,359 cc (4 cylinders), 2010 Citroen C-Crosser is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Citroen C-Crosser (168 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 62 more horse power than 1995 Mazda MX-3. (106 HP @ 6200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Citroen C-Crosser should accelerate faster than 1995 Mazda MX-3.
Because 2010 Citroen C-Crosser is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1995 Mazda MX-3. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Citroen C-Crosser will offer significantly more control. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2010 Citroen C-Crosser (232 Nm @ 4100 RPM) has 98 more torque (in Nm) than 1995 Mazda MX-3. (134 Nm @ 3600 RPM). This means 2010 Citroen C-Crosser will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1995 Mazda MX-3.
Compare all specifications:
1995 Mazda MX-3 | 2010 Citroen C-Crosser | |
Make | Mazda | Citroen |
Model | MX-3 | C-Crosser |
Year Released | 1995 | 2010 |
Body Type | Hatchback | Crossover |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1598 cc | 2359 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 106 HP | 168 HP |
Engine RPM | 6200 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 134 Nm | 232 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3600 RPM | 4100 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 5 doors |