Telluride 3.8 V6 GDI vs Mazda CX 3 2023 2.0L GS (FWD) Comparison
Car Information
Engine / Motor
/
190
/
4
Dimensions
7
5 Seater
5000
4275
1990
1765
1750
1535
2900
2570
/
240
Fuel Economy
/
15.4
71
48
Comfort
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Interior
Front Row Seats
/
Front Row Seats
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Safety
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Infotainment
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Transmission
Automatic
Automatic
Chassis & Steering
/
Front Wheel Drive
Key Spec
3.8 L - 3.8 L
2.0 L - 2000 L
291 - 291
145 BHP - 148 BHP
8 Speed AT & Automatic
Automatic
Gasoline & Petrol
Gasoline & Petrol
TBD
TBD
7 - 8
5 Seater
Exterior
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Engine
3.8
2.0 L
Gasoline
Gasoline
291
148 BHP
217
/
6100
/
355
192
5200
/
Technologies
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Comparison of configuration highlights
Telluride 3.8 V6 GDI
- Power Tailgate
- Push Button Start
- Parking sensor rear
- Parking sensor front
- Collision Safety Door Latch Open System
- Collision Safety Cut-Out
- Security System
- Collision Detection
- Blind Spot Warning
- ABS
- Lane Departure Warning
- Lane Keeping Assist
Mazda CX 3 2023 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
Review Comparison
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Related comparisons
Editor's PickMazda CX 3 2023 2.0L GS (FWD)
Expert / Editor Recommendation
Choose Telluride 3.8 V6 GDI if you care more about interior space; choose Mazda CX 3 2023 2.0L GS (FWD) if you care more about price.
Popular Car Comparisons
Q&A
- According to fuel consumption data, Telluride 3.8 V6 GDI has a fuel consumption of No data, while Mazda CX 3 2023 2.0L GS (FWD) has a fuel consumption of 6.49. Therefore, No data is more fuel-efficient.
- In terms of interior space, Telluride 3.8 V6 GDI has a wheelbase of 2900, while Mazda CX 3 2023 2.0L GS (FWD) has a wheelbase of 2570. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, Telluride 3.8 V6 GDI, offers more room.
- Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. Telluride 3.8 V6 GDI uses No data, while Mazda CX 3 2023 2.0L GS (FWD) uses Front Wheel Drive.