|
|
VS |
|
Welcome to the Suzuki Jimny Vs Mazda CX-3 comparison. The Suzuki Sierra Jimny has been around in it’s current specification since 1998, so that makes it one of the oldest models on the market today. Very few cars or SUVs make it to this age unless there is something special about them and yes the Jimny or Sierra Jimny has it. The Mazda CX-3 is arguably the best small SUV in the ‘smaller than usual’ SUV class, modern, high quality and value for money. So since we drove a Jimny recently we though its about time we did a series comparisons!
Suzuki Jimny Vs Mazda CX-3 exterior comparison: The Suzuki Jimny when introduced was a very modern looking 4WD and SUV and over the years has not dated for various reasons. In terms of not changing the exterior sheet metal, it will surpass many more popular cars that have been continuously made and unchanged. The current design out lasted the bubble and curve trends then the wedge or edge design trends and probably the latest drooping rear end and uglified trends too. The Mazda on the other hand looks great for now but how quickly will it age? and the CX-3 design is unlikely to last for more than 6 years. Regardless we like both designs for very different reasons.
Suzuki Jimny Vs Mazda CX-3 interior comparison: The CX-3 interior is throughly modern and high quality place to be, its really nice in the front seats anyway. There is lots of space compared to the Jimny but not exactly class leading in terms of maximising space available. The Suzuki Jimny is a smaller in comparison but there is enough space for 2 average sized adults in the front and 2 small children in the back. If you and your passenger are a little larger it will be tight front or back. The interior design is old school and traditional 4WD is style and 1990’s interior materials but very sturdy to touch.
Suzuki Jimny Vs Mazda CX-3 engines and technology comparison: Easy win in the technology area for the CX-3. It has most the modern technology in every way inside and outside. However the CX- is clearly designed for mainly on road drives and probably some dirt roads. Sure someone will probably try to take the CX-3 off road to prove how capable it is but it won’t go far without substantial modifications. The Jimny has some modern and traditional off road tech in the 4WD system but you need to know how to use it which what people these days don’t take the time to learn expecting button and computers to do all the thinking.
Suzuki Jimny Vs Mazda CX-3 drive comparison: The Jimny’s handling on normal roads is surprisingly good considering its hard core axles and short wheelbase. Sure it is a bit bumpy and relatively noisy on the road (mainly the engine) but so are most small cars but a little better off road. Although light weight the engine is low powered by today’s standards but it does have the latest tech helps it move quite well but you will need to floor it to keep up in faster traffic. The manual gear shift is actually good for a 4WD and with a proper low range gearbox makes it amazing off road – see youtube. The drive is high toque at low revs and hence feels old school. Haven’t driven the CX-3 at the time of this post.
The winner overall is the CX-3 in spec and probably drive but that doesn’t mean the Suzuki Jimny is rubbish. The Suzuki Jimny is the modern version of a 4WD classic, which is the best way to describe it. The Jimny is a great SUV for inner city commuting thanks to size and suspension capable of dealing with the poor condition of city roads and its great for off road fun. The Suzuki Jimny is great value for a genuine and traditional off roader. The CX-3 is not an all rounder since it doesn’t do off road but great high rise hatchback for general commuting and good value for money at the moment.
| Suzuki Jimny | Mazda CX-3 |
 |
 |
| Engines | |
| IL 4 Cylinder (M13A) IL 4 Cylinder petrol DOHC EFI VVT 1.3 Litre (1328cc) Claimed 62.5Kw @ 6000RPM Claimed 110Nm @ 4100RPM |
SKYACTIV-G IL4 Cylinder Petrol DOHC EFI 2.0 Litre (1998cc) Claimed 109Kw @ 6000RPM Claimed 192Nm @ 2800PM |
| KYACTIV-D IL4 cylinder Diesel 1.5 Litre (1499cc) Turbo-charged – DI – CR Claimed 77kW @ 4000rpm Claimed 270Nm @ 1600rpm |
|
| Weight | |
| Kerb weight 1060 – 1075Kg Towing capacity up to 1300kg |
Kerb weight FROM 1332Kg Towing capacity up to 1200Kg |
| Fuel capacity & consumption | |
| Up to 40 litres IL4 Petrol 7.1 Lts per 100km AVG (Manual) IL4 Petrol 7.4 Lts per 100km AVG (Auto) |
44 litres 2.0 litre Petrol: 6.7 litres per 100km 1.5 Litre Diesel: 5.1 litres per 100km |
| Other specifications | |
| 5 speed manual or 4 speed Auto Overall height/width 1705/1600 Overall length/wheelbase 3675/2250 4WD system: Selectable 4WD ANCAP Safety: 4/5 Tyre size: 205-70-15 |
6 speed Auto or manual Overall height/width 1550/1765 Overall length/wheelbase 4275/2570 Drive system: On demand AWD or 2WD Tyre size: 215-50-18 215-60-16 NCAP safety rating 5/5 |
| Capability | |
| Angle of: (degrees) Approach 42 Departure 46 Breakover xx Ground clearance (unloaded) 190mm Water Fording depth xxmm Max |
Angle of: (degrees) Approach xx Departure xx Breakover xx Ground clearance (unloaded) xxxmm Water Fording depth xxmm Max |
| Performance | |
| Pricing | |
| 2016 $20,990 – 22,990 AUD 2011 $20,490 – 22,490 AUD |
2015$19,990 – 37,990 AUD *Always check with the dealer for up to date pricing, specifications, on-road costs, accessories and specials etc.. everything as usual is subject to change! |