Mazda 3 2009 vs Seat Exeo 2009
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.6 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 | 102 HP | |
| Torque: | 187 NM | 148 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 12.6 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 3 engine produces 48 HP more power than Seat Exeo, whereas torque is 39 NM more than Seat Exeo. Thanks to more power Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.9 | 7.5 | |
|
The Seat Exeo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 3 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Seat Exeo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 60 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 930 km in combined cycle | |
| 850 km on highway | 1200 km on highway | ||
| Seat Exeo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 460'000 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 Seat Exeo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 10 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 3 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, 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. Mazda 3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Seat Exeo 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 | 4.66 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.43 m | |
|
Mazda 3 is smaller, but slightly higher. Mazda 3 is 17 cm shorter than the Seat Exeo, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 460 litres | |
|
Seat Exeo has more luggage space. Mazda 3 has 30 litres less trunk space than the Seat Exeo. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.8 metres less than that of the Seat Exeo, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`770 | 1`870 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda 3 scores higher in safety tests. The Mazda 3 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Seat Exeo has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3600 | 4600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Seat Exeo has
| |