2016 Mazda CX-3 vs 2016 Nissan Juke
The subcompact crossover segment is the hottest new segment on the market today, but with so many options popping up, you have quite a decision to make if you're looking to buy one. We're here to help by comparing two top models in the segments: the 2016 Mazda CX-3 vs 2016 Nissan Juke. Take a look at the chart down below and keep reading to learn more, and we'll see which vehicle has the edge.
Now, the CX-3 may be a crossover, but it's still plenty of fun to drive. Part of the fun comes from the simple fact that the CX-3 is impressively efficient, even in AWD configuration. Though the Juke can achieve nearly the same fuel economy, the figures posted down below only come from the Juke's NISMO trim with a manual transmission. If that doesn't suit you, the highest fuel economy rating for the Juke is 28 city and 32 highway mpg.
|2016 Mazda CX-3||VS||2016 Nissan Juke|
|35.0 inches||Rear Seat Legroom||32.1 inches|
|Up to 44.5 cu ft||Cargo Volume||Up to 35.9 cu ft|
|Up to 29 city/35 hwy||MPG||Up to 28 city/34 hwy|
Differences Between the 2016 Mazda CX-3 vs 2016 Nissan Juke
Both models come available with AWD, with the CX-3 offering Mazda's predictive i-ACTIV AWD system. The system is predictive, rather than just reactive, helping to detect wheel slips before they even occur and delivering power to where it needs to go. \
Inside the two vehicles, rear seat passengers will find a bit more legroom in the 2016 CX-3. But, this isn't at the expense of cargo space, as the CX-3 completely has the edge in that area with up to 44.5 cu ft of cargo space when the rear seats are folded down. Plus, the CX-3 comes standard with a touchscreen infotainment system and a rearview camera.
We can't compare every feature between the 2016 Mazda CX-3 vs 2016 Nissan Juke, so we suggest going for a spin instead. Contact us at Mazda of Lodi to learn more or to schedule time behind the wheel. We are certain you'll have a blast with Mazda's subcompact crossover.