The 2016 Mazda CX-3 vs. the 2016 Honda HR-V
For Vehicles With Several Similarities, the Mazda CX-3 Stills Comes Out on Top
Manufacturers are fervently contributing to the trendy subcompact-crossover segment. The 2016 Mazda CX-3 vs. the 2016 Honda HR-V near Sacramento, CA, are two such vehicles and both are brand-new for the 2016 lineup. Both fit in just below their popular older siblings, the Mazda CX-5 crossover and the CR-V crossover. Both come in a single engine configuration. So, which one stands out?
Well, the sub-header gave it away. The Mazda CX-3 wins this battle, but let’s go over why. The Mazda CX-3 comes equipped with a 2.0-liter 4-cylinder engine that pumps out 146 horsepower and 146 lbs.-ft. of torque. The HR-V comes with 1.8-liter 4-cylinder engine with 141 horsepower and 127 lbs.-ft. of torque with an optional CVT. CVTs are usually known to produce better fuel economy but, in this case, it doesn’t hold true. The Mazda CX-3 clocks in at 31 MPG combined1, breaking down to 29 MPG in the city1 and a whopping 35 MPG on the highway1. The HR-V clocks in a bit lower with only 28 MPG combined1, and 25/34 city/hwy MPG1. Round one has a clear winner in the Mazda CX-3.
Round two of the 2016 Mazda CX-3 vs. the 2016 Honda HR-V near Sacramento, CA, has everything to do with performance. Not to mention that you’re probably never going to end up racing your Mazda CX-3 or your Honda HR-V, the Mazda CX-3 would still win, which is all that matters here. In testing, the Mazda CX-3 went from 0-100 MPH in 23.8 seconds, while the HR-V lagged behind with 29.1 seconds2. Some more realistic comparisons would be 0-30 MPH, a typical traffic speed, and the Mazda CX-3 shined, again, here. The Mazda CX-3 was up to speed in only 2.8 seconds, whereas the HR-V took its sweet time, coming in at 3.7 seconds2. Faster up to speed means less honking behind you and a happier countenance when arriving at work. Going from 0-60 MPH, highway speeds, the HR-V took 9.3 seconds, trailing behind the Mazda CX-3, which was up to snuff at 8.1 seconds2. We could probably forgive all of this if the fuel economy on the HR-V was better, which is usually the trade-off for a CVT, but we’ve already determined that that’s just not how this has all lined up. So, round two, once again, goes to the Mazda CX-3.
The Mazda CX-3 uses smaller tires which help contribute to the great fuel economy, but also lower the overall curb weight of the vehicle, which allows for better performance, a tighter turn radius, and higher turning speeds. The Mazda CX-3 can turn faster, at up to speeds of 42.1 MPH2 and the HR-V trails with a turning speed of 39.7 MPH2. With that final sucker punch, the Mazda CX-3 has knocked the HR-V out of the ring.
Reducing this battle between the 2016 Mazda CX-3 vs. the 2016 Honda HR-V near Sacramento, CA, can only do so much, though. Get on down to Mazda of Elk Grove and let the test drive do the talking. Elk Grove’s top-notch staff will take care of you and make sure you walk out the door with the best vehicle.
2. Information courtesy of torquenews.com.