Mazda 3 2018 vs Mazda 3 2013

 
Mazda 3
2018 - 2018
Mazda 3
2013 - 2016
Gearbox: ManualAutomatic
Engine: 2.5 Petrol2.5 Petrol
Camshaft drive: Timing chainTiming chain

Performance

Power: 184 HP184 HP
Torque: 251 NM251 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: n/a secondsn/a seconds
Mazda 3 2018 and Mazda 3 2013 have the same engine power, the torque is the same for both cars.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 8.47.6
The Mazda 3 2013 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
Mazda 3 2018 consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3 2013, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 2018 could require 120 litres more fuel.
Fuel tank capacity: 51 litres51 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 600 km in combined cycle670 km in combined cycle
710 km on highway790 km on highway
Mazda 3 2013 gets more mileage on one fuel tank.
Ground clearance: 155 mm (6.1 inches)155 mm (6.1 inches)

Engines

Average engine lifespan: 440'000 km440'000 km
Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used.
Engine production duration: 11 years11 years

Dimensions

Length: 4.47 m4.51 m
Width: 1.80 m1.76 m
Height: 1.45 m1.47 m
Mazda 3 2018 is 4 cm shorter than the Mazda 3 2013, 5 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 3 2018 is 2 cm lower.
Trunk capacity: 364 litres364 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
1334 litres1263 litres
Turning diameter: 10.6 metersno data
Gross weight (kg): no datano data
Safety: no data
Quality:Mazda 3 2018 has fewer problems.
According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 3 2013 has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Mazda 3 2018, so Mazda 3 2018 quality is probably better
Average price (€): 10 4007600
Pros and Cons: Mazda 3 has
  • fewer faults
Mazda 3 has
  • lower fuel consumption
  • more full fuel tank mileage
  • lower price
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv