Nissan Almera 2002 vs Mazda 3 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 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: | 116 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 163 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | 12.5 seconds | |
| Nissan Almera engine produces 11 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 18 NM more than Mazda 3. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 7.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.3 l/100km | 8.7 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Almera consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Almera could require 30 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Almera consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan Almera gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 165 mm (6.5 inches) | 160 mm (6.3 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 420'000 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: | 8 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Nissan Primera, Nissan Almera Tino, Nissan Sentra | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Mazda Xedos 6, Mazda MX-3, Kia RIO, Kia Cerato, Kia Carens | |
| 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 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: | 4.44 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.47 m | |
|
Nissan Almera is smaller. Nissan Almera is 5 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Almera is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 393 litres | 413 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1285 litres | |
| Nissan Almera has 20 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Almera is 0.5 metres less than that of the Mazda 3, which means Nissan Almera can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`735 | 1`730 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Almera has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 2400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 9.4/10 | 8.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Almera has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |