Ford Focus 2014 vs Mazda 3 2013
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 150 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.1 seconds | 10.3 seconds | |
| Ford Focus engine produces 5 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 20 NM more than Mazda 3. Despite the higher power, Ford Focus reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.8 | 5.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Focus is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Focus consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that by driving the Ford Focus over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 51 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1140 km in combined cycle | 960 km in combined cycle | |
| 1300 km on highway | 1180 km on highway | ||
| 830 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford Focus gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 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: | 12 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Ford Mondeo, Ford C-Max, Ford EcoSport | Used also on Mazda 2 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Ford Focus might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| 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: | 4.53 m | 4.59 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.45 m | |
| Ford Focus is 5 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 6 cm wider, while the height of Ford Focus is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 374 litres | 419 litres | |
|
Mazda 3 has more luggage space. Ford Focus has 45 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Focus is 0.4 metres more than that of the Mazda 3, which means Ford Focus can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`900 | 1`800 | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Mazda 3 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Focus has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8200 | 11 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Focus has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |