2012 Citroen C-Crosser vs. 2013 Mazda 3
To start off, 2013 Mazda 3 is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2012 Citroen C-Crosser. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2012 Citroen C-Crosser would be higher. At 2,489 cc (4 cylinders), 2013 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Citroen C-Crosser (168 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 3 more horse power than 2013 Mazda 3. (165 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2012 Citroen C-Crosser should accelerate faster than 2013 Mazda 3.
Because 2012 Citroen C-Crosser is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2013 Mazda 3. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 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, 2012 Citroen C-Crosser (232 Nm @ 4100 RPM) has 4 more torque (in Nm) than 2013 Mazda 3. (228 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2012 Citroen C-Crosser will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2013 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
2012 Citroen C-Crosser | 2013 Mazda 3 | |
Make | Citroen | Mazda |
Model | C-Crosser | 3 |
Year Released | 2012 | 2013 |
Body Type | Crossover | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2359 cc | 2489 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 168 HP | 165 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 232 Nm | 228 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4100 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 88 mm | 89 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 87 mm | 100 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.5:1 | 9.7:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |