CX-3 2.0L GT 2WD vs BJ30e Comparison
Car Information
Dimensions
5
5 Seater
215 / 60 / R16
/
4275
/
1765
/
1535
/
2570
/
Fuel Economy
15.3
/
48 LITRES
/
Comfort
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Interior
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Safety
Dynamic Stability Control
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Infotainment
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
6
/
Transmission
6 Speed SkyActiv with Sports Mode
DHT
Wheels/brakes
ELECTRIC PARKING BRAKE
/
Key Spec
2.0 L - 2.0 L
1.5 L - 1.5 L
145 BHP - 148 BHP
154 BHP - 185
6 Speed SkyActiv with Sports Mode & Automatic
7DCT & DHT & DHT
Gasoline & Petrol
Gasoline & Hybrid
TBD
TBD
5 - 5
5 - 5
Exterior
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Engine
2.0L
1.5 L
Gasoline
Hybrid
SKYACTIV-G 4 Cylinder
/
148 HP
154 BHP
148 HP @ 6000 RPM
/
192
/
192 NM @ 2800 RPM
/
Technologies
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Comparison of configuration highlights
CX-3 2.0L GT 2WD
- Push Button Start
- Keyless Entry
- Parking sensor rear
- Rear Camera
- Vehicle Stability Control (VSC)
- EBD (Electronic Brakeforce Distribution)
- ABS
- Speed Alert
BJ30e
Review Comparison
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Related comparisons
Editor's PickBJ30e
Expert / Editor Recommendation
Choose CX-3 2.0L GT 2WD if you care more about overall equipment; choose BJ30e if you care more about price.
Popular Car Comparisons
Q&A
- According to fuel consumption data, CX-3 2.0L GT 2WD has a fuel consumption of 6.54, while BJ30e has a fuel consumption of No data. Therefore, No data is more fuel-efficient.
- In terms of interior space, CX-3 2.0L GT 2WD has a wheelbase of 2570, while BJ30e has a wheelbase of No data. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, No data, offers more room.
- Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. CX-3 2.0L GT 2WD uses No data, while BJ30e uses No data.