BMW 2 series 2017 vs Mazda 3 2019
| Body: | Coupe | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 184 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 270 NM | 213 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.2 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
|
BMW 2 series is more dynamic to drive. BMW 2 series engine produces 34 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 57 NM more than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power BMW 2 series reaches 100 km/h speed 2.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 | 6.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.2 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
By specification BMW 2 series consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that by driving the BMW 2 series over 15,000 km in a year you can save 210 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, BMW 2 series consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 51 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 940 km in combined cycle | 730 km in combined cycle | |
| 1100 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| 630 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Mazda 3) 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 (BMW 2 series) 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. | |||
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 3 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 1 sērija, BMW X3, BMW X1 | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda MX-5, Mazda CX-5, Mazda CX-3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| BMW 2 sērija 2017 2.0 engine: Until 2015, engines used to have problems with the timing chain guides, which have been resolved over time. Other problems with this engine are the oil pump performance and its drive chain, as well as cracking ... More about BMW 2 sērija 2017 2.0 engine Mazda 3 2019 2.0 engine: This engine is not well-suited for low-quality fuel, as it quickly clogs the fuel system. The use of substandard fuel often leads to the failure of expensive ignition coils, resulting in significant repair ... More about Mazda 3 2019 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.43 m | 4.46 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.44 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. BMW 2 series is 3 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 2 cm narrower, while the height of BMW 2 series is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 390 litres | 295 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1019 litres | |
|
BMW 2 series has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, BMW 2 series has 95 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. The Mazda 3 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 | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 2 series is 0.3 metres more than that of the Mazda 3. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`910 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| BMW 2 series has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mazda 3, so BMW 2 series quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 23 200 | 21 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 2 sērija has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |