The Mahindra XUV 3XO ZNG and Tata Nexon iCNG are the only SUVs in the segment to pair a factory-fitted CNG kit with a turbo-petrol engine. Both are offered only with a 6-speed manual gearbox and use a twin-cylinder CNG setup that’s situated under the boot floor. So, if you want to keep running costs in check without giving up the performance of a turbo-petrol engine, which of these two compact SUVs should you consider?
Explore full specs, features and a price breakdown in our XUV 3XO vs Nexon comparison.
Mahindra XUV 3XO vs Tata Nexon CNG: Specifications
The XUV 3XO makes more power and torque in CNG mode than the Nexon
|
Mahindra XUV 3XO vs Tata Nexon CNG: Specifications |
||
|
|
Mahindra XUV 3XO ZNG |
Tata Nexon iCNG |
|
Engine |
3 cyls, turbo-petrol + CNG |
3 cyls, turbo-petrol + CNG |
|
Displacement (cc) |
1,197 |
1,199 |
|
Power in CNG mode (hp) |
111 (5,000rpm) |
100 (5,000rpm) |
|
Torque in CNG mode (Nm) |
200 (1,500-3,500rpm) |
170 (2,000-3,000rpm) |
|
Gearbox |
6-speed MT |
6-speed MT |
|
CNG capacity (litres) |
60 |
60 |
|
Petrol tank (litres) |
42 |
44 |
Both compact SUVs are powered by a 1.2-litre three-cylinder turbo-petrol engine with multi-point fuel injection (MPFI). However, it’s the XUV 3XO’s engine that produces 11hp and 30Nm more than the Nexon’s in CNG mode. Mahindra claims that its 10-bar CNG injection system allows the XUV 3XO to deliver identical power and torque outputs whether on petrol or CNG.
Conversely, the Nexon sees a drop in output when switching from petrol to CNG fuel. The XUV 3XO CNG’s peak torque of 200Nm is not only 30Nm more than the Nexon’s, but it’s also spread across a wider RPM band. Both models have a combined CNG capacity of 60 litres, though the Nexon’s petrol tank is two litres larger.
Each SUV leads in one cycle, but the XUV 3XO edges ahead overall
|
Mahindra XUV 3XO vs Tata Nexon CNG: Real-world mileage |
||
|
|
Mahindra XUV 3XO ZNG |
Tata Nexon iCNG |
|
Tested city mileage (km/kg) |
16.75 |
15.10 |
|
Tested highway mileage (km/kg) |
22.29 |
23.70 |
|
Tested average mileage (km/kg) |
19.52 |
19.40 |
The Mahindra XUV 3XO ZNG returned a combined figure of 19.52 km/kg in our real-world tests, which is only 0.12 km/kg better than the Tata Nexon iCNG’s 19.40 km/kg figure. However, both arrive at these numbers in different ways. The XUV 3XO ZNG held the lead in the city cycle by delivering an average of 16.75 km/kg, which is 1.65 km/kg better than the Nexon iCNG.
The Nexon iCNG performed better on the highway cycle with its real-world average of 23.70 km/kg, which is 1.41 km/kg more than the XUV 3XO’s 22.29 km/kg figure. Combined, it was the Mahindra XUV 3XO ZNG that offered better mileage, albeit by a narrow margin.
Mahindra XUV 3XO vs Tata Nexon CNG: Prices
|
Mahindra XUV 3XO vs Tata Nexon CNG prices |
||
|
|
Mahindra XUV 3XO ZNG |
Tata Nexon iCNG |
|
Price range (in Rs, lakh) |
9.99-11.19 |
8.35-13.42 |
The entry-level Mahindra XUV 3XO CNG variant costs Rs 1.64 lakh more than its equivalent Tata Nexon CNG. The equation changes at the top end, where it’s the XUV 3XO CNG that’s Rs 2.23 lakh more affordable. With its strong city mileage and better overall fuel efficiency, the Mahindra XUV 3XO ZNG is our logical pick here.
Autocar India’s fuel efficiency testing
Before our real-world fuel efficiency tests, we fill our test cars’ tanks to the brim and maintain tyre pressures based on the manufacturer’s recommendations. These cars are driven in fixed city and highway loops in and around Navi Mumbai, and we maintain certain average speeds. Throughout the tests, there is only one person in each car, running the air conditioner and other electricals, such as the audio system, indicators and wipers, when required, just like a regular user would. Periodic driver swaps further neutralise variations in driver patterns. At the end of each cycle, we calculate efficiency by filling the tanks to full again.
Prices are ex-showroom, India.
