HomeArticlesProductsKeywordsCompanies

Compare Alfa Romeo MiTo facelift 2 vs Alfa Romeo MiTo vs Mazda 2 III

Variants
0.9 TwinAir 105
1.3 JTD 95
1.4
1.4 TB MultiAir 140 TCT
1.4 TB MultiAir 170 TCT
0.9 TwinAir 105
0.9 TwinAir 85
1.3 JTD 90
1.3 JTD 85
1.4
1.4 MPI
1.4 TB MultiAir 105
1.4 TB MultiAir 135
1.4 TB 120
1.4 TB 155
1.4 TB MultiAir 135 DCT
1.4 TB MultiAir 170
1.6 JTD
1.5 SkyActiv-D
1.5 SkyActiv-G 115
1.5 SkyActiv-G 75
1.5 SkyActiv-G 90
1.5 SkyActiv-G 90 AT

Capacity

Cargo Capacity
270 L / 9.5 cu-ft ~ 950 L / 33.5 cu-ft
280 L / 9.9 cu-ft ~ 950 L / 33.5 cu-ft
Fuel Capacity
45.0 L / 11.9 gal
45.0 L / 11.9 gal
44.0 L / 11.6 gal
Passengers
5
5

Chassis

Brakes | Front
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Brakes | Rear
Disc
Drum
Power Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Suspension | Front
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
Suspension | Rear
Semi-independent, coil spring
Semi-independent, Torsion beam
Semi-independent, Torsion beam
Turning Circle
10.9 m / 35.8 ft

Construction

Body Style
3-door Hatchback
5-door Hatchback

Dimensions

Ground Clearance
143 mm / 5.6 in
Size | Height
1446 mm / 56.9 in
1495 mm / 58.9 in
Size | Length
4063 mm / 160.0 in
4060 mm / 159.8 in
Size | Width
1720 mm / 67.7 in
1720 mm / 67.7 in
1695 mm / 66.7 in | 1983 mm / 78.1 in (mirror unfolded)
Track Width | Front
1475.0 mm / 58.1 in
1483.0 mm / 58.4 in
1495.0 mm / 58.9 in
Track Width | Rear
1469.0 mm / 57.8 in
1475.0 mm / 58.1 in
1485.0 mm / 58.5 in
Wheelbase
2511 mm / 98.9 in
2511 mm / 98.9 in
2570 mm / 101.2 in

Performance

Coefficient Of Drag
0.29
Towing Capacity
515 kg / 1135 lbs (w/o brakes) | 1100 kg / 2425 lbs (w/ brakes @ 12% gradient)

Powertrain

Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Emission Standard
Euro 6
Euro 6

Production

Availability
2016 ~ 2018

Reviews

Neofiliac score
23%
25%
26%
Pros
  • Low official fuel consumption
  • Low official fuel consumption
  • Beautiful design
  • Good 0.28 drag coefficient
  • Very low fuel consumption
  • Small turning circle
Cons
  • No powerful engine options
  • Tiny engines
  • No independent rear suspensions
  • No powerful engine options
  • Very tiny engines
  • No independent rear suspensions
  • Bad 0-100kph time
  • Miserably low engine output
  • Only available with tiny engines
  • Semi-independent rear suspensions

Price

Offers (incl. referral links)
Remove
Remove
Remove
Add up to 4 products to the comparison using the search bar above
Information on this page is provided on an as-is basis. No warranty on accuracy is implied. This page may contain affiliate links to third-party merchants such as Amazon and eBay. If you make a purchase using the supplied link, we may receive a commission. Neofiliac places the utmost respect for your privacy. We use no cookie whatsoever beyond that needed for the proper functioning of the website.