Mazda 3 2009 vs Subaru Impreza 2008
| Body: | Hatchback | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 107 HP | |
| Torque: | 187 NM | 142 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 15 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 3 engine produces 43 HP more power than Subaru Impreza, whereas torque is 45 NM more than Subaru Impreza. Thanks to more power Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 4.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 7.5 | |
| Mazda 3 consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Subaru Impreza, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 15 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 940 km on highway | 950 km on highway | ||
| Subaru Impreza gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mazda 3 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda MX-5, Mazda 5, Mazda CX-5 | Used only for this car | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.46 m | 4.58 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.48 m | |
| Mazda 3 is 12 cm shorter than the Subaru Impreza, 2 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 340 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1360 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.6 metres less than that of the Subaru Impreza, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`835 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda 3 is better rated in child safety tests. The Mazda 3 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 4200 | 3400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Subaru Impreza has
| |