Mazda 6 2010 vs Mazda 6 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 192 HP | |
| Torque: | 226 NM | 256 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 7.8 seconds | |
|
Mazda 6 2012 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 6 2010 engine produces 22 HP less power than Mazda 6 2012, whereas torque is 30 NM less than Mazda 6 2012. Due to the lower power, Mazda 6 2010 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.4 | 6.3 | |
|
The Mazda 6 2012 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 6 2010 consumes 2.1 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 315 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 980 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 1240 km on highway | ||
| Mazda 6 2012 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 440'000 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 6 2010 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda Tribute | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda CX-5 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 6 2012 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| 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 m | 4.87 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.45 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 litres | 489 litres | |
|
Mazda 6 2010 has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Mazda 6 2010 has 30 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: | no data | 10.2 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Average price (€): | 4400 | 6800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 6 has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |