Mazda 3 2006 vs Volkswagen Golf 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 265 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.1 seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 3 engine produces 115 HP more power than Volkswagen Golf, whereas torque is 180 NM more than Volkswagen Golf. Thanks to more power Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.7 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.6 l/100km | 8.5 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Golf is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 2.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Golf, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 375 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 2.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Golf. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 560 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 730 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 510 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Golf gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 320'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda CX-7 | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Audi A3, Seat Altea, Seat Leon | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Golf 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: | 4.44 m | 4.20 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.48 m | |
| Mazda 3 is 24 cm longer than the Volkswagen Golf, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 3 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1229 litres | 1305 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Golf has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mazda 3 has 50 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Golf. This could mean that the Mazda 3 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volkswagen Golf (by 76 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| 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`910 | 1`850 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Volkswagen Golf has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 3 has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Volkswagen Golf, so Volkswagen Golf quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 1800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.8/10 | 8.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Volkswagen Golf has
| |