Want an Audi Q3? Try the Mazda CX-3
It’s possible to get a vehicle that’s virtually the same for a lot less cash
Car buyers dream about their next new vehicle, but they may not have deep enough pockets to snag their first choice. Fortunately, there’s never been so much variety in the market and automakers now offer much more car for much less dough.
Take, for instance, the red-hot small crossover, essentially a taller version of a four-door hatchback. Automakers around the globe are tripping over themselves to get into this popular segment.
For new-vehicle buyers desiring a more luxurious small crossover experience, we like the 2016 Audi Q3. And if you don’t have enough room in your budget to afford refined German engineering and luxury goodies, we think you should test drive a 2016 Mazda CX-3, a value-laden, fun alternative: WANT THIS:
2016 Audi Q3 The premise of the Q3 is that buyers shouldn’t have to sacrifice the top-notch build quality, sophisticated design and renowned German engineering found in pricier Audi luxury crossovers just because they want to drive something a little more manageable in size. In that context, the fivepassenger, four-door Q3 is a small luxury crossover you can easily fall into wanting.
Both smaller and less expensive than the Audi A4 sedan-based Q5 crossover, front-wheel-drive versions of the A3-based Q3 start at $34,300. Adding traction to all four wheels will cost you another $2,500. Whether you opt for the Audi-branded Quattro AWD or not, all Q3s come with a turbocharged 2.0-litre four-cylinder engine that makes 200 horsepower and 207 pound-feet of torque. A smooth-shifting, six-speed Tiptronic automatic transmission is standard Q3 fare.
Also on board are features that substantiate the small Audi’s luxury badge. In addition to the expected power everything inside, the Audi comes with goodies that include blind-spot detection, rear backup camera, proximity keyless entry and start, power tailgate and an upgraded sound system.
One area where the Audi stands out from its rivals is its exceptionally well executed cabin. You might be in the German brand’s smallest crossover, but all of the Q3’s dials, buttons and controls feel as if they came from any of Audi’s top-of-the-line models.
It may be marketed as a small SUV, but the Q3’s driving demeanour falls more in line with a luxury sedan, offering a surprisingly quiet cabin at highway speeds and a comfortable ride over bad pavement. Overall, the Q3 feels larger and better insulated from the road than mainstream small crossovers.
With an upscale interior, sedan like ride and handling, plus a price advantage over its rivals, the 2016 Audi Q3 is a great pick if you want a luxury crossover in a compact package.
Alternative pick: 2015 BMW X1 xDrive28i ($36,990) GET THIS INSTEAD
2016 Mazda CX-3 If your budget can’t handle the Q3’s premium sticker, you should take a look at the five-passenger, four-door 2016 Mazda CX-3.
With a starting price of $20,695 for the FWD GX — almost $12,000 less than the Audi — the frontor all-wheel-drive Mazda small crossover comes relatively well equipped for its price. Standard fare includes such niceties as a large colour touchscreen display, rear-view camera, push-button start and a six-way adjustable driver’s seat.
If you want to try to match the base model Q3’s generous amount of kit, the top-level CX-3 GT AWD ($31,020) adds leather all around, voice-activated navigation system, upgraded audio system, heated front seats and more. Add the optional Tech Package ($1,500), and you get advanced safety features that include blindspot monitoring, rear cross-traffic alert, Smart City brake support and lane-departure warning.
Despite a weaker (146 horsepower/146 lb-ft) 2.0-L four-cylinder engine and six-speed autobox as its lone powertrain, the CX-3 is only 0.1 second slower from zero to 100 km/h than the Q3, which takes 8.2 seconds. The key difference is that the Mazda weighs 331 kilograms less than the heftier Audi (1,670 kg). Being heavier is one of the reasons the Q3 feels more substantial and luxurious on the road, but it’s also why the AWD CX-3 scores better fuel economy estimates: 8.8 L/100 km (city) and 7.3 (highway), versus the Audi’s 11.9/8.4 ratings.
Although not up to Audi’s higher standards, the CX-3’s functional, ergonomic design and high-quality materials make its cabin feel more expensive than the majority of the mainstream competition.
All in all, for small-crossover buyers on a budget, the 2016 Mazda CX-3 is a definite must-see.
Alternative pick: 2016 Nissan Juke
($20,498)