Mazda 3 2009 vs Mazda 3 2006

 
Mazda 3
2009 - 2011
Mazda 3
2006 - 2009
Gearbox: AutomaticAutomatic
Engine: 2.5 Petrol2.3 Petrol

Performance

Power: 167 HP156 HP
Torque: 228 NM203 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: n/a secondsn/a seconds
Mazda 3 2009 engine produces 11 HP more power than Mazda 3 2006, whereas torque is 25 NM more than Mazda 3 2006.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 7.79.4
The Mazda 3 2009 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
Mazda 3 2009 consumes 1.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3 2006, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 2009 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 255 litres of fuel.
Fuel tank capacity: 60 litres44 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 770 km in combined cycle460 km in combined cycle
880 km on highway540 km on highway
Mazda 3 2009 gets more mileage on one fuel tank.
Ground clearance: 155 mm (6.1 inches)160 mm (6.3 inches)

Dimensions

Length: 4.60 m4.49 m
Width: 1.76 m1.76 m
Height: 1.47 m1.47 m
Mazda 3 2009 is 11 cm longer than the Mazda 3 2006, width is practically the same also the height of the cars does not differ significantly.
Trunk capacity: 335 litres413 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
no data1285 litres
Mazda 3 2006 has more luggage space.
Despite its longer length, Mazda 3 2009 has 78 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 3 2006. This could mean that the Mazda 3 2009 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable.
Turning diameter: 10.4 meters10.9 meters
The turning circle of the Mazda 3 2009 is 0.5 metres less than that of the Mazda 3 2006, which means Mazda 3 2009 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces.
Gross weight (kg): no datano data
Safety:
Quality:
high

high
Average price (€): 36002400
Pros and Cons: Mazda 3 has
  • more power
  • lower fuel consumption
  • more full fuel tank mileage
  • higher safety
Mazda 3 has
  • roomier boot
  • lower price
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv