Mazda 3 2009 vs BMW 3 series 2008
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 187 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 20 HP less power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 23 NM less than BMW 3 series. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.9 | 6.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.0 l/100km | 8.9 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 210 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 960 km in combined cycle | |
| 850 km on highway | 1230 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW 3 series gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
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 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 1 sērija | |
| 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: | no | yes | |
| The BMW 3 series 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: | 4.49 m | 4.53 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Mazda 3 is smaller, but higher. Mazda 3 is 4 cm shorter than the BMW 3 series, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 460 litres | |
|
BMW 3 series has more luggage space. Mazda 3 has 30 litres less trunk space than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.6 metres less than that of the BMW 3 series, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`770 | 1`920 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3600 | 5800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |