Mazda 6 2008 vs Mazda 3 2006

 
Mazda 6
2008 - 2010
Mazda 3
2006 - 2009
Body: HatchbackSedan
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: AutomaticManual
Engine: 2.0 Petrol2.0 Petrol
Camshaft drive: Timing chainTiming chain

Performance

Power: 147 HP150 HP
Torque: 184 NM187 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 11 seconds9 seconds
Mazda 3 is a more dynamic driving.
Mazda 6 engine produces 3 HP less power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 3 NM less than Mazda 3. Due to the lower power, Mazda 6 reaches 100 km/h speed 2 seconds later.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 7.78.2
Real fuel consumption: 8.6 l/100km8.2 l/100km
By specification Mazda 6 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that by driving the Mazda 6 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel.
But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda 6 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3.
Fuel tank capacity: 64 litres55 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 830 km in combined cycle670 km in combined cycle
1120 km on highway870 km on highway
740 km with real consumption670 km with real consumption
Mazda 6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank.
Ground clearance: 165 mm (6.5 inches)160 mm (6.3 inches)

Engines

Average engine lifespan: 420'000 km420'000 km
Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used.
Engine production duration: 13 years13 years

Dimensions

Length: 4.76 m4.49 m
Width: 1.80 m1.76 m
Height: 1.44 m1.47 m
Mazda 6 is larger, but slightly lower.
Mazda 6 is 27 cm longer than the Mazda 3, 4 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 6 is 3 cm lower.
Trunk capacity: 510 litres413 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
1702 litres1285 litres
Mazda 6 has more luggage capacity.
Mazda 6 has 97 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 6 (by 417 litres).
Turning diameter: 11.4 meters10.9 meters
The turning circle of the Mazda 6 is 0.5 metres more than that of the Mazda 3, which means Mazda 6 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces.
Gross weight (kg): 1`9751`770
Safety:
Quality:
above average

high
Mazda 3 has fewer problems.
According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 6 has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably better
Average price (€): 32002400
Pros and Cons: Mazda 6 has
  • more full fuel tank mileage
  • roomier boot
  • higher safety
Mazda 3 has
  • more dynamic
  • fewer faults
  • lower price
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv