Mazda 3 2003 vs Skoda Octavia 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 8.4 seconds | |
|
Skoda Octavia is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 45 HP less power than Skoda Octavia, whereas torque is 65 NM less than Skoda Octavia. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 7.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 8.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Octavia, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 105 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Octavia. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 910 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 16 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Mazda Xedos 6, Mazda MX-3, Kia RIO, Kia Cerato, Kia Carens | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Audi A4, Audi A3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.42 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.73 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.43 m | |
| Mazda 3 is 9 cm shorter than the Skoda Octavia, 3 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 3 is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
635 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.5 metres less than that of the Skoda Octavia, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Electric power steering | Hydraulic power steering | |
| Electric power steering is simpler, quieter, more fuel-efficient, more configurable and provides additional features such as auto-steering for lane assist and parking. The disadvantages of electric power steering are possible overheating under prolonged load conditions and insufficient feedback (feeling) during steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`695 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Mazda 3 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Skoda Octavia, so Mazda 3 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.2/10 | 5.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Skoda Octavia has
| |