Audi TT 2010 vs Mazda MX-5 2008
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 211 HP | 161 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 188 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.1 seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
|
Audi TT is more dynamic to drive. Audi TT engine produces 50 HP more power than Mazda MX-5, whereas torque is 162 NM more than Mazda MX-5. Thanks to more power Audi TT reaches 100 km/h speed 2.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 8.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.0 l/100km | 9.1 l/100km | |
|
The Audi TT is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Audi TT consumes 0.8 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 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Audi TT consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda MX-5. | |||
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.19 m | 4.02 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.36 m | no data | |
| Trunk capacity: | 250 litres | no data | |
| 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`635 | no data | |
| 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
| |