BMW 3 series 2008 vs Mazda 3 2009
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 143 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 187 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is more dynamic to drive. BMW 3 series engine produces 7 HP less power than Mazda 3, but torque is 3 NM more than Mazda 3. Despite less power, BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 7.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.8 l/100km | 9.0 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that by driving the BMW 3 series over 15,000 km in a year you can save 225 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 980 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 1210 km on highway | 850 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW 3 series gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Ground clearance: | 144 mm (5.7 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: | 350'000 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: | 6 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 1 sērija | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, 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 3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The BMW 3 series 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.53 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.47 m | |
|
BMW 3 series is larger, but lower. BMW 3 series is 4 cm longer than the Mazda 3, 7 cm wider, while the height of BMW 3 series is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 460 litres | 430 litres | |
|
BMW 3 series has more luggage capacity. BMW 3 series has 30 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.6 metres more than that of the Mazda 3, which means BMW 3 series can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`910 | 1`770 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5800 | 3600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |