Alfa Romeo 159 2005 vs Mazda 6 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 185 HP | 141 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 181 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.8 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
|
Alfa Romeo 159 is more dynamic to drive. Alfa Romeo 159 engine produces 44 HP more power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 49 NM more than Mazda 6. Thanks to more power Alfa Romeo 159 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 | 8.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.3 l/100km | 8.4 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Alfa Romeo 159 consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Alfa Romeo 159 could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Alfa Romeo 159 consumes 1.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 670 km with real consumption | 760 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 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 6 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Alfa Romeo Brera, Alfa Romeo Spider | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda MX-5, Mazda 5, 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 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Alfa Romeo 159 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. | |||
| Mazda 6 2002 2.0 engine: The engine tends to idle unevenly. Engine problems may also include the thermostat and cooling pump. This engine tends to consume more oil at higher mileages. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.66 m | 4.67 m | |
| Width: | 1.83 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.44 m | |
| Alfa Romeo 159 is 1 cm shorter than the Mazda 6, 5 cm wider, while the height of Alfa Romeo 159 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 405 litres | 500 litres | |
|
Mazda 6 has more luggage space. Alfa Romeo 159 has 95 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Alfa Romeo 159 is 0.2 metres more than that of the Mazda 6. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`010 | 1`840 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | Alfa Romeo 159 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 6 has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Alfa Romeo 159, so Alfa Romeo 159 quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.8/10 | 6.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Alfa Romeo 159 has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |