Compare performance (286 HP vs 186 HP), boot space and price (49,700 £ vs 25,000 £ ) at a glance. Find out which car is the better choice for you – Ford Transit Custom Transporter or Mazda 3 Hatchback?
All details on performance, efficiency, range and trunk space can be found in the technical comparison below – including user reviews for both models.
Looking at overall running costs, both models reveal some interesting differences in everyday economy.
Mazda 3 Hatchback is considerably cheaper – starting at 25,000 £ , while the Ford Transit Custom Transporter costs 49,700 £ . That’s a price difference of around 24,654 £.
Power, torque and acceleration say a lot about how a car feels on the road. This is where you see which model delivers more driving dynamics.
When it comes to engine power, the Ford Transit Custom Transporter offers noticeably more power – delivering 286 HP compared to 186 HP. That’s roughly 100 HP more horsepower.
There’s also a difference in torque: the Ford Transit Custom Transporter delivers significantly more torque with 630 Nm compared to 240 Nm. That’s about 390 Nm more.
Cabin size, boot volume and payload all play a role in everyday practicality. Here, comfort and flexibility make the difference.
Seats: Ford Transit Custom Transporter offers more seats – 6 vs 5.
The Ford Transit Custom Transporter holds a decisive overall lead in the objective data comparison.
This result only shows which model scores more points on paper – not which of the two cars feels right for you.
The Transit Custom is a clever, no-nonsense workhorse that blends roomy practicality with surprisingly car-like driving manners, so your workday feels less like a chore and more like efficient transport. With a sensible interior, smart storage and tidy handling, it’s the kind of van that makes owners smile while they get on with the job — reliable, unfussy and built to keep moving.
detailsThe Mazda 3 hatchback blends elegant design with a surprisingly sporty drive, giving a cabin that feels more upscale than you’d expect for the segment. Practical enough for everyday life yet eager to entertain behind the wheel, it’s a smart, good-humored choice that makes even grocery runs feel like a mini escape.
detailsCosts and Consumption |
|
|---|---|
|
Price
49,700 - 77,400 £
|
Price
25,000 - 36,000 £
|
|
Consumption L/100km
-
|
Consumption L/100km
5.6 - 6.5 L/100km
|
|
Consumption kWh/100km
-
|
Consumption kWh/100km
-
|
|
Electric Range
-
|
Electric Range
-
|
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
|
co2
0 g/km
|
co2
126 - 146 g/km
|
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Dimensions and Body |
|
|---|---|
|
Body Type
Cargo Van
|
Body Type
Hatchback
|
|
Seats
3 - 6
|
Seats
5
|
|
Doors
-
|
Doors
-
|
|
Curb weight
-
|
Curb weight
1,417 - 1,529 kg
|
|
Trunk capacity
-
|
Trunk capacity
351 L
|
|
Length
-
|
Length
-
|
|
Width
2,032 mm
|
Width
1,795 mm
|
|
Height
-
|
Height
-
|
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
|
Payload
-
|
Payload
487 - 502 kg
|
Engine and Performance |
|
|---|---|
|
Engine Type
Electric
|
Engine Type
Petrol MHEV
|
|
Transmission
Automatic
|
Transmission
Manuel, Automatic
|
|
Transmission Detail
Reduction Gearbox
|
Transmission Detail
Manual Gearbox, Automatic Gearbox
|
|
Drive Type
Rear-Wheel Drive, All-Wheel Drive
|
Drive Type
Front-Wheel Drive, All-Wheel Drive
|
|
Power HP
136 - 286 HP
|
Power HP
140 - 186 HP
|
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
-
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
8 - 9.8 s
|
|
Max Speed
-
|
Max Speed
-
|
|
Torque
415 - 630 Nm
|
Torque
238 - 240 Nm
|
|
Number of Cylinders
-
|
Number of Cylinders
4
|
|
Power kW
100 - 210 kW
|
Power kW
103 - 137 kW
|
|
Engine capacity
-
|
Engine capacity
1,998 - 2,488 cm3
|
General |
|
|---|---|
|
Model Year
2025
|
Model Year
2026
|
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
A
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
D, E
|
|
Brand
Ford
|
Brand
Mazda
|