Audi A7 2014 vs Mazda 3 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 245 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 580 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.3 seconds | 8.1 seconds | |
|
Audi A7 is more dynamic to drive. Audi A7 engine produces 95 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 200 NM more than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power Audi A7 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 4.1 | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Audi A7 consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Audi A7 could require 270 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 73 litres | 51 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1230 km in combined cycle | 1240 km in combined cycle | |
| 1370 km on highway | 1410 km on highway | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Ground clearance: | 112 mm (4.4 inches) | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 3 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Mazda 3 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 350'000 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 Audi A7 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Audi Q5 | Used also on Mazda 6, 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 3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.97 m | 4.47 m | |
| Width: | 1.91 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Audi A7 is larger, but slightly lower. Audi A7 is 51 cm longer than the Mazda 3, 12 cm wider, while the height of Audi A7 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 535 litres | 364 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1390 litres | 1263 litres | |
|
Audi A7 has more luggage capacity. Audi A7 has 171 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Audi A7 (by 127 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Audi A7 is 1.3 metres more than that of the Mazda 3, which means Audi A7 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`395 kg | 1`910 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`976 kg | 1`320 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 419 kg | 590 kg | |
| Audi A7 load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 41 procentiem less than Mazda 3. Therefore, Mazda 3 is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Audi A7 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 3 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Audi A7, so Audi A7 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 27 800 | 7000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi A7 has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |