Audi TT 2010 vs Mazda MX-5 2009
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 160 HP | 126 HP | |
| Torque: | 250 NM | 167 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.4 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
Audi TT is more dynamic to drive. Audi TT engine produces 34 HP more power than Mazda MX-5, whereas torque is 83 NM more than Mazda MX-5. Thanks to more power Audi TT reaches 100 km/h speed 2.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.5 | 7.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Audi TT is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Audi TT consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda MX-5, which means that by driving the Audi TT over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Audi TT consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda MX-5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 1030 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 620 km with real consumption | ||
| Audi TT gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Audi TT) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Mazda MX-5) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
| Mazda MX-5 2009 1.8 engine: The engine often has unstable idling speeds and problems with the thermostat. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.19 m | 4.72 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.36 m | 1.26 m | |
| Audi TT is 53 cm shorter than the Mazda MX-5, 12 cm wider, while the height of Audi TT is 10 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 250 litres | 150 litres | |
|
Audi TT has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Audi TT has 100 litres more trunk space than the Mazda MX-5. The Mazda MX-5 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Audi TT is 0.9 metres more than that of the Mazda MX-5, which means Audi TT can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`605 | 1`375 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Audi TT has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda MX-5 has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Audi TT, so Audi TT quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | no data | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi TT has
|
Mazda MX-5 has
| |