Mazda CX 3 2024 2.0L GS (FWD) vs 03T Comparison
Car Information
SUV
/
8.3
/
Engine / Motor
190
/
4
/
Dimensions
5 Seater
/
4275
/
1765
/
1535
/
2570
/
240
/
Fuel Economy
15.4
/
48
/
Comfort
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Interior
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Safety
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Infotainment
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Transmission
Automatic
/
Chassis & Steering
Front Wheel Drive
/
Key Spec
2.0 L - 2.0 L
/
145 BHP - 148 BHP
422
6 Speed SkyActiv with Sports Mode & Automatic
AT
Gasoline & Petrol
Electric
TBD
/
5 - 5
5
/
TBD
/
TBD
Exterior
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Engine
2.0 L
/
Gasoline
/
148 BHP
/
192
/
Technologies
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Comparison of configuration highlights
Mazda CX 3 2024 2.0L GS (FWD)
- Audio Controls on Steering Wheel
- Electronic engine immobilizer
- Rear Defogger
- Temperature Display
- Keyless Entry
- Welcome Light
- Steering Adjustment
- Anti-Theft Alarm System
- Door Mirrors with Side Turn Signal
- Parking Sensors - Front and Rear
- EBD (Electronic Brakeforce Distribution)
- ABS
- Child Seat Interface (ISOFIX)
- Active braking
03T
Review Comparison
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Related comparisons
Editor's Pick03T
Expert / Editor Recommendation
Choose Mazda CX 3 2024 2.0L GS (FWD) if you care more about overall equipment; choose 03T if you care more about power.
Q&A
- According to fuel consumption data, Mazda CX 3 2024 2.0L GS (FWD) has a fuel consumption of 6.49, while 03T has a fuel consumption of No data. Therefore, No data is more fuel-efficient.
- In terms of interior space, Mazda CX 3 2024 2.0L GS (FWD) has a wheelbase of 2570, while 03T 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. Mazda CX 3 2024 2.0L GS (FWD) uses Front Wheel Drive, while 03T uses No data.