Mazda CX-3 2.0 Sport FWD (2017) vs Nissan NV350 Urvan Standard M/T (2018)
A full spec-by-spec comparison of Mazda CX-3 2.0 Sport FWD (2017) vs Nissan NV350 Urvan Standard M/T (2018) — engine, performance, dimensions, features and price, with the differences highlighted to help you decide.
| Specification | Mazda CX-3 2.0 Sport FWD (2017) Mazda ₱1,510,000 |
Nissan NV350 Urvan Standard M/T (2018)
Nissan
₱1,570,000
|
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Model Year | 2017 | 2018 |
| Warranty | 100,000 km/3-years | 3-years/ 100,000km |
| Availability | Current | Current |
| Engine & Drivetrain | ||
| Engine Type | Inline-4 | Inline-4 |
| Displacement | 1998cc | 2488cc |
| Valvetrain | DOHC 16-valve | DOHC 16-valve |
| Aspiration | Naturally Aspirated | Turbocharged |
| Fuel Type | Gas | Diesel |
| Max Power | 148 PS @ 6000 rpm | 129 PS @ 3200 rpm |
| Max Torque | 192 Nm @ 2800 rpm | 356 Nm @ 1400 - 2000 rpm |
| Transmission | 6-Speed A/T | 5-Speed M/T |
| Drivetrain | FWD | RWD |
| Compression Ratio | — | 15:1 |
| Body & Dimensions | ||
| Body Type | Crossover | Van |
| Segment | J | Van |
| Construction | Unibody | Body on Frame |
| Doors | 5 | 3 |
| Seating Capacity | 2+3 | 15 |
| Length (mm) | 4275 | 4695 |
| Width (mm) | 1765 | 1695 |
| Height (mm) | 1535 | 1990 |
| Wheelbase (mm) | 2570 | 2555 |
| Curb Weight (kg) | 1223 | 2076 |
| Fuel Tank (L) | 44 | 65 |
| Exterior Colors | — | Gun Metallic, Brilliant Silver, Pearl White, Alpine White, Topaz Brown, Graphite Black |
| Chassis, Wheels & Brakes | ||
| Front Suspension | MacPherson Strut | Torsion Beam |
| Rear Suspension | Torsion Beam Axle | Rigid Axle, Leaf Spring |
| Front Wheels | 18 Alloy | 15 steel |
| Rear Wheels | 18 Alloy | 15 steel |
| Front Tires | 215/50 R18 | 195/70/R15 |
| Rear Tires | 215/50 R18 | 195/70/R15 |
| Front Brakes | Disc | Disc |
| Rear Brakes | Disc | Drum |
| Steering Type | EPS | Hydraulic |
| Steering Column | tilt + tele | Tilt |
| Tire Pressure Monitoring | No | No |
| Differential Lock | No | No |
| Safety | ||
| Anti-lock Braking (ABS) | Yes | Yes |
| Electronic Brakeforce Distribution | Yes | Yes |
| Brake Assist | Yes | No |
| Parking Sensors | Yes | No |
| Stability Control | No | No |
| Traction Control | No | No |
| Vehicle Dynamic Control | No | No |
| Forward Collision Mitigation | No | No |
| Blind Spot Warning | No | No |
| Hill Start Assist | No | No |
| Hill Descent Control | No | No |
| Auto Stop/Start | No | No |
| Driver Airbag | No | No |
| Knee Airbag | Yes | No |
| Passenger Airbag | No | No |
| Front Curtain Airbags | Yes | No |
| Rear Curtain Airbags | Yes | No |
| Rear Side Airbags | Yes | No |
| Engine Immobilizer | Yes | No |
| Security Alarm | Yes | No |
| Door Locking | Central Locking | Central Locking |
| Comfort & Convenience | ||
| Air Conditioning | Auto Climate Control System | Manual Aircon w/ rear independent controls |
| Rear A/C Vents | Yes | No |
| Seat Material | Leather | Fabric |
| Parking Brake | Manual | Manual |
| Key Type | Smart Entry | Keyless Entry |
| Push-Button Start | Yes | No |
| Cruise Control | No | No |
| Multi-Info Display | Yes | Yes |
| Paddle Shifters | No | No |
| Reverse Camera | No | No |
| Auto Headlights | No | No |
| Power Windows | Yes | Yes |
| Power Seats | No | No |
| Remote Trunk Release | No | No |
| Eco Mode | No | No |
| Antenna | yes | yes |
| Infotainment & Audio | ||
| Speakers | 6 | 4 |
| Touchscreen | Yes | No |
| Navigation | Yes | No |
| Bluetooth | No | No |
| Apple CarPlay | No | No |
| Android Auto | No | No |
| USB | Yes | No |
| AUX Input | Yes | No |
| AM/FM Radio | Yes | No |
| CD Player | Yes | No |
| DVD Player | No | No |
| MP3 Playback | Yes | No |
| iPod Support | No | No |
| SD Card Slot | No | No |
| Lighting | ||
| Headlights | LED | Halogen |
| Fog Lights | Yes | Yes |
| Daytime Running Lights | Yes | No |
Mazda CX-3 2.0 Sport FWD (2017) vs Nissan NV350 Urvan Standard M/T (2018): which should you buy?
The Mazda CX-3 and Nissan NV350 Urvan serve completely different purposes, so your choice depends entirely on your needs. The Mazda CX-3 is a stylish, compact crossover ideal for daily commuting and city driving. It offers a more powerful gasoline engine (148 PS) with a smooth 6-speed automatic transmission, better handling (FWD, unibody), and a 5-seat capacity. At ₱1,510,000, it's slightly cheaper than the NV350. However, it has less torque (192 Nm) and smaller cargo space. The Nissan NV350 Urvan is a body-on-frame van designed for heavy passenger or cargo transport. It has a turbo diesel engine with massive torque (356 Nm) for hauling, a 5-speed manual, and RWD for better load carrying. It seats more (though exact capacity not given, typical for vans) and costs ₱1,570,000. Its diesel engine is more fuel-efficient for long trips but less refined. Choose the CX-3 if you want a fun, efficient daily driver with modern features. Choose the NV350 if you need a rugged workhorse for transporting people or goods.
Frequently asked questions
Which is cheaper?
The Mazda CX-3 is cheaper at ₱1,510,000 compared to the Nissan NV350 Urvan at ₱1,570,000.
Which is more powerful?
The Mazda CX-3 has higher horsepower (148 PS vs 129 PS), but the Nissan NV350 has significantly more torque (356 Nm vs 192 Nm), making it better for heavy loads.
Which is better for daily commuting?
The Mazda CX-3 is better for daily commuting due to its automatic transmission, smaller size, and more refined gasoline engine. The NV350's manual transmission and diesel engine are less convenient in stop-and-go traffic.
Which has a better warranty?
Both offer a 3-year/100,000 km warranty, so they are equal in this aspect.