Mazda 6 2010 vs Mazda 6 2012

 
Mazda 6
2010 - 2013
Mazda 6
2012 - 2015
Gearbox: AutomaticAutomatic
Engine: 2.0 Petrol2.0 Petrol
Camshaft drive: Timing chainTiming chain

Performance

Power: 147 HP150 HP
Torque: 184 NM210 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 10.9 seconds10.6 seconds
Mazda 6 2012 is a more dynamic driving.
Mazda 6 2010 engine produces 3 HP less power than Mazda 6 2012, whereas torque is 26 NM less than Mazda 6 2012. Due to the lower power, Mazda 6 2010 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 7.76.1
The Mazda 6 2012 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
Mazda 6 2010 consumes 1.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6 2012, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 6 2010 could require 240 litres more fuel.
Fuel tank capacity: 64 litres62 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 830 km in combined cycle1010 km in combined cycle
1120 km on highway1260 km on highway
Mazda 6 2012 gets more mileage on one fuel tank.

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 years12 years
Engine spread: Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda MX-5, Mazda 5, Mazda CX-5Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda MX-5, Mazda CX-5, Mazda CX-3
In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts.
Hydraulic tappets: noyes
The Mazda 6 2012 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: 4.76 m4.87 m
Width: 1.80 m1.84 m
Height: 1.44 m1.45 m
Mazda 6 2010 is smaller.
Mazda 6 2010 is 12 cm shorter than the Mazda 6 2012, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 6 2010 is 1 cm lower.
Trunk capacity: 519 litres483 litres
Mazda 6 2010 has more luggage capacity.
Even though the car is shorter, Mazda 6 2010 has 36 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 6 2012. The Mazda 6 2012 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers.
Turning diameter: 11.8 meters10.2 meters
The turning circle of the Mazda 6 2010 is 1.6 metres more than that of the Mazda 6 2012, which means Mazda 6 2010 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces.
Gross weight (kg): 1`940no data
Safety: no data
Quality:
average

average
Average price (€): 44006600
Pros and Cons: Mazda 6 has
  • roomier boot
  • lower price
Mazda 6 has
  • lower fuel consumption
  • more full fuel tank mileage
  • better manoeuvrability
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv