Mazda 3 2006 vs Opel Astra 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 155 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 11.7 seconds | |
| Mazda 3 engine produces 11 HP less power than Opel Astra, whereas torque is 10 NM less than Opel Astra. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The Opel Astra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Opel Astra, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Opel Astra. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 790 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 1090 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| Opel Astra gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 160 mm (6.3 inches) | 160 mm (6.3 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 16 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Mazda Xedos 6, Mazda MX-3, Kia RIO, Kia Cerato, Kia Carens | Used also on Opel Mokka | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mazda 3 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.42 m | 4.42 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.51 m | |
| Mazda 3 and Opel Astra are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | 370 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
635 litres | 1235 litres | |
|
Opel Astra has more luggage space. Mazda 3 has 70 litres less trunk space than the Opel Astra. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Opel Astra (by 600 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.5 metres less than that of the Opel Astra, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`725 | 1`870 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Opel Astra has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 3800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.8/10 | 8.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Opel Astra has
| |