BMW X1 (2016) vs. Mazda CX-3 (2016) Specs

vs.

◆

2016 BMW X1 and 2016 Mazda CX-3 Specifications

Model Year	2016	2016
Model	BMW X1	Mazda CX-3
Engine	turbocharged 2.0L I4 DOHC-4v 228 hp@5000 258 lb-ft@1250	2.0L I4 DOHC-4v 146 hp@6000 146 lb-ft@2800
Transmission	8-speed shiftable automatic	6-speed shiftable automatic
Drivetrain	AWD	AWD
Body	4dr SUV	4dr SUV
			Difference
Wheelbase	105.1 in	101.2 in	3.9 in
Length	174.8 in	168.3 in	6.5 in
Width	71.7 in	69.6 in	2.1 in
Height	63.5 in	60.7 in	2.8 in
Curb Weight	3660 lb.	2952 lb.	708 lb.
Fuel Capacity	16.1 gal.	12.7 gal.	3.4 gal.
Headroom, Row 1	42.0 in	38.4 in	3.6 in
Shoulder Room, Row 1	56.7 in	53.5 in	3.2 in
Hip Room, Row 1	0.0 in	52.3 in	-52.3 in
Legroom, Row 1	40.4 in	41.7 in	-1.3 in
Headroom, Row 2	39.4 in	37.2 in	2.2 in
Shoulder Room, Row 2	57.2 in	50.4 in	6.8 in
Hip Room, Row 2	0.0 in	49.0 in	-49 in
Legroom, Row 2	37.0 in	35.0 in	2 in
Total Legroom	77.4 in (over 2 rows)	76.7 in (over 2 rows)	0.7 in
Cargo Volume, Minimum	27.1 ft³	12.4 ft³	14.7 ft³
Cargo Volume, Maximum	58.7 ft³	44.5 ft³	14.2 ft³

Return to top

TrueDelta Reviews the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2016 BMW X1

2016 BMW X1 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros
Year	Comment
2016	When the engine and transmission are mounted sideways, much more space can be allocated for passengers and cargo. Compared to the BMW X3, which has a longitudinal powertrain, the X1 is nine inches shorter (175 vs. 184), two inches narrower (72 vs. 74), and two inches lower (64 vs. 66), yet it has a little more headroom, rear shoulder room, and legroom. A funny thing: according to the official specs, the 2013-2015 X1 had only an inch less combined legroom than the new one. The difference feels much greater. It helps that the seats are mounted higher in the new X1. Even the largest feet can fit beneath the front seats at a comfortable angle. Want to tap your toes while riding in back? Go for it, there's plenty of space under there--a rarity among upscale cars. This combined with the relatively high rear seat cushion means that the average adult (e.g. 5-9 me) enjoys sufficient thigh support, which is often lacking in much larger crossovers. When all the way back, a $300 sliding and reclining second-row seat adds another inch of rear legroom. Though worthwhile overall, its seat backs return to a fully vertical position after being folded. Each of its three sections must then be reset one by one at a comfortable angle, a nuisance. The Audi Q3's rear seat is far tighter. The spec sheet suggests a mere 31 inches of rear legroom, a considerable half-foot less than in the new X1. In reality the Audi's rear seat doesn't seem quite that tight. I can sit behind myself with at most two inches of knee room to spare, vs. about five in the BMW. Still, with a tall driver the Q3's rear legroom would becomes essentially zero. The Lincoln MKC's rear seat isn't much roomier than the Audi's, while the Lexus NX has about as much rear knee room as the BMW but a lower seat cushion and less foot room beneath its front seats. Though the new Mini Clubman shares both the new UKL platform and a 105-inch wheelbase with the 2016 X1, its roof is seven inches lower, a big difference, and its seats are mounted lower than those in the average car, much less a crossover. There's perhaps an inch more knee room than in the Audi. The next Mini Countryman should be close in size to the X1. see full BMW X1 review

What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2016 BMW X1

None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2016 BMW X1.

Be the first!

TrueDelta Reviews the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2016 Mazda CX-3

2016 Mazda CX-3 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros
Year	Comment
2016	The CX-3's driving position is very good, more car-like even than the HR-V's. The view forward is open. The view rearward, not so much, as the racy styling yields rear windows that are quite a bit smaller than the front ones. To help compensate, the outside mirrors are large plus blind sport warning is standard on the Touring and Grand Touring. The CX-3's driver seat is very comfortable and provides good lateral support in turns. The cloth center pocket is cushy without being mushy. Unlike in the HR-V and some others, the headrest does not jut uncomfortably far forward. But the lumbar bulge is not adjustable. As is, it fit my back well, but many people will wish for more of a bulge. The HR-V's also non-adjustable lumbar bulge was too pronounced for my taste. The JUKE's seats are comfortable, but for effective side bolsters (and then some) you must step up to the NISMO. Worth noting for those of you who get your coffee to go: the cup holders are located beneath the armrest (optional on the Sport, standard on the others). If you want to use them, then you can't use the armrest. see full Mazda CX-3 review

2016 Mazda CX-3 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons
Year	Comment
	For people who have no interest in a manual transmission (the great majority), the Mazda CX-3's largest shortcoming is a rear seat that is tight even by small car standards. Sitting behind my 5-9 self, my knees pressed lightly against the front seat backs. I wasn't uncomfortable, but felt a little closed-in. A shame, as rear headroom is relatively plentiful and the rear seat is otherwise very comfortable. The HR-V provides about four inches more rear legroom, a big difference. According to their specs, the JUKE has three inches less rear legroom than the Mazda. In reality, though, I had perhaps an inch more rear knee room, but less rear headroom. The Nissan's rear seat might be slightly more adult-friendly than the Mazda's, but neither is a good choice if people taller than me will be sitting in both rows. see full Mazda CX-3 review

What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2016 Mazda CX-3

None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2016 Mazda CX-3.

Be the first!

See TrueDelta's information for all SUVs

See TrueDelta's information for all BMW models.