Small SUVs are gaining popularity due to its versatility. We face in this comparison to Renault Captur against Opel Crossland X and Mazda CX-3 with gasoline engines between 110 and 120 hp.

The variety of choice currently it offers the car market It is greater than ever, with very specific niches satisfy tastes of all kinds. Of all the types of car, it is hard not to notice that the category that has grown-and still is that of haciéndolo- SUV and within the SUV, he B segment (SUV small or urban) You are experiencing a kind of golden age. In fact, virtually have replaced small minivans, less numerous or, in some cases, reinvented under aesthetic SUV.

Newcomer Opel Crossland X adds to this market trend and does so by providing arguments. In this comparison we face the leader of the segment, Renault Captur, and an aspirational CX-3 putting the note "premium" the comparative. We chose their petrol engines between 110 and 120 hp, but each with a different configuration.

BENEFITS	Mazda CX-3 SKYACTIV-G 2.0 120 hp	Crossland Opel Ecotec 110 hp 1.2T X	Renault Captur 1.2 Energy TCe 120 hp
Acel. 0-100 km / h	9.0 s	11.14 s	10.23 s
Acel. 0-1000 meters	30.3 s	32.83 s	31.93 s
Loudness 100 km / h	66 dBA	66.9 dBA	66,5 dBA
Loudness 120 km / h	70.4 dBA	70.1 dBA	69.2 dBA
Braking from 140 km / h	78.5 m	74.13 m	71.48 m
Weight scale	1,194 kg	1,277 kg	1,289 kg

Meanwhile he CX-3 chooses engine four cylinders atmospheric with a fairly high displacement to what we are used to seeing lately –2.0 liters, rivals resort to two separate propellants 1.2 liters turbocharged, with three cylinders in the case of Opel Crossland X, and four in the Renault Captur. Each maintains a style for response and refinement, but stresses the Mazda above the other two, not only for pleasure to use, but also for the actual fuel consumption obtained in the test, which was lower despite be the model that accredits more consumption of three on the official sheet. The no turbo makes your answer is very dispensable and linear, but it is still strong if demand performance, thanks to a torque that except for a few laps, comes close to its supercharged rivals, combined with some developments of change a little shorter. Neither him Crossland X nor the Captur They respond so immediacy and softness to throttle commands and, sometimes, their response is less dispensable and requires corrections to the accelerator pedal. As a point in their favor, both provide a greater amount of torque that allows them to move with good ease in gear or when the car is loaded, although in the case of Opel, changing only 5-speed hurts him in some of our measurements.

Renault Captur, Opel Crossland X and CX-3: Behavior

As for behavior, 4×2 configuration these versions does not allow much fanfare outside the asphalt. Despite its aesthetic, high altitude and defenses in the underbody (more aesthetic than functional) are not field cars. his ground clearance, yes, gives some reassurance to park on uneven areas (the roadside, for example), jump on the curb or overcome speed bumps, and when travel on roads in poor condition. All three offer a similar degree of comfort, with a remarkable quality of bacheo and good filtering irregularities by a moron relatively soft cushions.

CONSUMPTION	Mazda CX-3 SKYACTIV-G 2.0 120 hp	Crossland Opel Ecotec 110 hp 1.2T X	Renault Captur 1.2 Energy TCe 120 hp
Consumption city	6,8 l / 100 km	7.5 l / 100 km	7.1 l / 100 km
Consumption Highway	5,8 l / 100 km	6,4 l / 100 km	6.2 l / 100 km
average consumption	6.2 l / 100 km	6,8 l / 100 km	6.6 l / 100 km

Should make a demanding driving sections of curves, he Opel Crossland X sample before its limits and is more vague, making it clear that is more comfortable to keeping quiet rhythms with a vehicle of this type. He CX-3, instead, It is sportier and transmits greater sense of poise, without giving up a rear capable of slightly rounded turns to fluff, thus providing some incentive to driving, but in no time becomes excessive. He Renault Captur, very subject of both trains, is the end which achieves a speed step higher curve, very driveability and agility as it announces its limit of adhesion with understeer relatively early that the ESP is responsible for directing, making the car is immediately drawn to gird marked by management. Also when braking has been the best records obtained.

Renault Captur, Opel Crossland X and CX-3: Inside

except CX-3, these SUV They come to occupy the place left by type minivan models, namely Renault Captur ranks and last Modus Opel Crossland X It does the same as the missing Meriva, reinterpreting their approach, so the habitable section is particularly important. He CX-3, meanwhile, it is longer and lower than its opponents, which gives it a more dynamic and sporty image, but detracts luggage capacity and makes it the least familiar of the three. His mouth load is also smaller and is at a higher ground level, so loading and unloading of bulky or heavy objects may be more fatiguing. In terms of practicality is the Opel who achieves better results, although the Captur, with its rear row of seats longitudinally sliding, also it provides great versatility, despite being the one with a shorter body. Width is the Crossland X the one that stands out, especially in the rear seats, which will facilitate the work in case you have to put two child seats more comfortable way.

SPACE	Mazda CX-3 SKYACTIV-G 2.0 120 hp	Crossland Opel Ecotec 110 hp 1.2T X	Renault Captur 1.2 Energy TCe 120 hp
front width	136 cm	136 cm	135 cm
rear width	127 cm	132 cm	127 cm
front height	93/98 cm	90/97 cm	94/101 cm
rear height	90 cm	89 cm	89 cm
Legroom	71 cm	71 cm	59-74 cm
Trunk	340 liters	425 liters	370-485 liters

The most luxurious approach Mazda It is again noted in the materials chosen for the interior, because the higher versions offer such striking features as the dashboard partially covered in leather, with matching door inserts and upholstery. Their shots and appearance are the care of the lot, although in terms of equipment all three are at a good level, especially if we consider that this is a modest until recently segment B. In this regard, there are certain elements that highlight its high technological burden, as the Head-Up Display in the case of Mazda and Opel, type LED headlamps, opening doors and keyless start, lane departure warning, heated steering wheel (Opel), blind spot monitoring, fatigue detector (Opel), rear camera … Not to mention a complete connectivity according to the times, with different applications in all three cases and generous touch screens (the Mazda It adds a rotary knob, additionally), where it shows that the Crossland X It was the last to arrive, both for its generous size and the speed of response to our command. Naturally, each excels in some specific points, specializing in one type of user, so that, ultimately, individual preferences can make a difference in favor of either model.

Newcomer Opel Crossland X adds to this market trend and does so by providing arguments. In this comparison we face the leader of the segment, Renault Captur, and an aspirational CX-3 putting the note "premium" the comparative. We chose their petrol engines between 110 and 120 hp, but each with a different configuration.

BENEFITS	Mazda CX-3 SKYACTIV-G 2.0 120 hp	Crossland Opel Ecotec 110 hp 1.2T X	Renault Captur 1.2 Energy TCe 120 hp
Acel. 0-100 km / h	9.0 s	11.14 s	10.23 s
Acel. 0-1000 meters	30.3 s	32.83 s	31.93 s
Loudness 100 km / h	66 dBA	66.9 dBA	66,5 dBA
Loudness 120 km / h	70.4 dBA	70.1 dBA	69.2 dBA
Braking from 140 km / h	78.5 m	74.13 m	71.48 m
Weight scale	1,194 kg	1,277 kg	1,289 kg

Meanwhile he CX-3 chooses engine four cylinders atmospheric with a fairly high displacement to what we are used to seeing lately –2.0 liters, rivals resort to two separate propellants 1.2 liters turbocharged, with three cylinders in the case of Opel Crossland X, and four in the Renault Captur. Each maintains a style for response and refinement, but stresses the Mazda above the other two, not only for pleasure to use, but also for the actual fuel consumption obtained in the test, which was lower despite be the model that accredits more consumption of three on the official sheet. The no turbo makes your answer is very dispensable and linear, but it is still strong if demand performance, thanks to a torque that except for a few laps, comes close to its supercharged rivals, combined with some developments of change a little shorter. Neither him Crossland X nor the Captur They respond so immediacy and softness to throttle commands and, sometimes, their response is less dispensable and requires corrections to the accelerator pedal. As a point in their favor, both provide a greater amount of torque that allows them to move with good ease in gear or when the car is loaded, although in the case of Opel, changing only 5-speed hurts him in some of our measurements.

Renault Captur, Opel Crossland X and CX-3: Behavior

As for behavior, 4×2 configuration these versions does not allow much fanfare outside the asphalt. Despite its aesthetic, high altitude and defenses in the underbody (more aesthetic than functional) are not field cars. his ground clearance, yes, gives some reassurance to park on uneven areas (the roadside, for example), jump on the curb or overcome speed bumps, and when travel on roads in poor condition. All three offer a similar degree of comfort, with a remarkable quality of bacheo and good filtering irregularities by a moron relatively soft cushions.

CONSUMPTION	Mazda CX-3 SKYACTIV-G 2.0 120 hp	Crossland Opel Ecotec 110 hp 1.2T X	Renault Captur 1.2 Energy TCe 120 hp
Consumption city	6,8 l / 100 km	7.5 l / 100 km	7.1 l / 100 km
Consumption Highway	5,8 l / 100 km	6,4 l / 100 km	6.2 l / 100 km
average consumption	6.2 l / 100 km	6,8 l / 100 km	6.6 l / 100 km

Should make a demanding driving sections of curves, he Opel Crossland X sample before its limits and is more vague, making it clear that is more comfortable to keeping quiet rhythms with a vehicle of this type. He CX-3, instead, It is sportier and transmits greater sense of poise, without giving up a rear capable of slightly rounded turns to fluff, thus providing some incentive to driving, but in no time becomes excessive. He Renault Captur, very subject of both trains, is the end which achieves a speed step higher curve, very driveability and agility as it announces its limit of adhesion with understeer relatively early that the ESP is responsible for directing, making the car is immediately drawn to gird marked by management. Also when braking has been the best records obtained.

Renault Captur, Opel Crossland X and CX-3: Inside

except CX-3, these SUV They come to occupy the place left by type minivan models, namely Renault Captur ranks and last Modus Opel Crossland X It does the same as the missing Meriva, reinterpreting their approach, so the habitable section is particularly important. He CX-3, meanwhile, it is longer and lower than its opponents, which gives it a more dynamic and sporty image, but detracts luggage capacity and makes it the least familiar of the three. His mouth load is also smaller and is at a higher ground level, so loading and unloading of bulky or heavy objects may be more fatiguing. In terms of practicality is the Opel who achieves better results, although the Captur, with its rear row of seats longitudinally sliding, also it provides great versatility, despite being the one with a shorter body. Width is the Crossland X the one that stands out, especially in the rear seats, which will facilitate the work in case you have to put two child seats more comfortable way.

SPACE	Mazda CX-3 SKYACTIV-G 2.0 120 hp	Crossland Opel Ecotec 110 hp 1.2T X	Renault Captur 1.2 Energy TCe 120 hp
front width	136 cm	136 cm	135 cm
rear width	127 cm	132 cm	127 cm
front height	93/98 cm	90/97 cm	94/101 cm
rear height	90 cm	89 cm	89 cm
Legroom	71 cm	71 cm	59-74 cm
Trunk	340 liters	425 liters	370-485 liters

The most luxurious approach Mazda It is again noted in the materials chosen for the interior, because the higher versions offer such striking features as the dashboard partially covered in leather, with matching door inserts and upholstery. Their shots and appearance are the care of the lot, although in terms of equipment all three are at a good level, especially if we consider that this is a modest until recently segment B. In this regard, there are certain elements that highlight its high technological burden, as the Head-Up Display in the case of Mazda and Opel, type LED headlamps, opening doors and keyless start, lane departure warning, heated steering wheel (Opel), blind spot monitoring, fatigue detector (Opel), rear camera … Not to mention a complete connectivity according to the times, with different applications in all three cases and generous touch screens (the Mazda It adds a rotary knob, additionally), where it shows that the Crossland X It was the last to arrive, both for its generous size and the speed of response to our command. Naturally, each excels in some specific points, specializing in one type of user, so that, ultimately, individual preferences can make a difference in favor of either model.