Xpander Cross High Line vs CX3 2.0L GT (FWD) Comparison
Car Information
Engine / Motor
1499cc
/
/
190 km/h
Dimensions
7
5 Seater
4,595
4275 mm
1,790
1765 mm
1,750
1535 mm
2,775
2570 mm
/
240 L
Fuel Economy
45
48 L
/
15.4 Km/L
/
15.4 Km/L
Comfort
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
/
✓
/
✓
Interior
✓
/
Driver Seat
/
High-grade fabric,Synthetic leather
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Safety
✓
/
2
/
T135/90D16
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
Infotainment
✓
/
6
/
Transmission
4AT
/
Chassis & Steering
Front Drive
All Wheel Drive
MacPherson strut
/
Torsion beam
/
Wheels/brakes
✓
/
✓
/
Ventilated Disc
/
Drum
/
205/55R17
/
205/55R17
/
Exterior
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Engine
1.5
2.0 L
Gasoline
Gasoline
105
148 BHP
141
192 Nm
4000rpm
/
Technologies
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Key Spec
/
2.0 L - 2000 L
/
110 BHP - 148 BHP
/
Automatic
/
Petrol
/
TBD
/
5 Seater
Comparison of configuration highlights
Xpander Cross High Line
- Electronic Engine Immobilizer
- Cool Box
- Rear Defogger
- Rear AC Controls
- Welcome Light
- Anti-Theft Alarm System
- Number of Airbags
- Spare Wheel
- ABS
- EBD/CBC
- Child Lock
CX3 2.0L GT (FWD)
- Parking sensor rear
- Parking sensor front
- ABS
Review Comparison
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Related comparisons
Editor's PickCX3 2.0L GT (FWD)
Expert / Editor Recommendation
Choose Xpander Cross High Line if you care more about interior space; choose CX3 2.0L GT (FWD) if you care more about power.
Q&A
- According to fuel consumption data, Xpander Cross High Line has a fuel consumption of No data, while CX3 2.0L GT (FWD) has a fuel consumption of 6.49. Therefore, No data is more fuel-efficient.
- In terms of interior space, Xpander Cross High Line has a wheelbase of 2,775, while CX3 2.0L GT (FWD) has a wheelbase of 2570 mm. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, Xpander Cross High Line, offers more room.
- Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. Xpander Cross High Line uses Front Drive, while CX3 2.0L GT (FWD) uses All Wheel Drive.