BMW 3 series 2010 vs Mazda 6 2010
| Body: | Coupe | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 156 HP | 147 HP | |
| Torque: | 200 NM | 184 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is more dynamic to drive. BMW 3 series engine produces 9 HP more power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 16 NM more than Mazda 6. Thanks to more power BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.9 | 7.7 | |
| BMW 3 series consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW 3 series could require 30 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 790 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 1060 km on highway | 1120 km on highway | ||
| Mazda 6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
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 6 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 3, 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 6 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. | |||
| BMW 3 sērija 2010 2.0 engine: The BMW N43 engine is built around a lightweight alloy cylinder block with a twin-cam, 16-valve head. It uses a dual-pump fuel delivery system—one located inside the tank to transfer fuel and supply the high-pressure pump, which then boosts fuel pressure up to 200 bar. Notably, the system lacks a fine fuel filter and relies only on a ... More about BMW 3 sērija 2010 2.0 engine Mazda 6 2010 2.0 engine: The engine tends to idle unevenly. Engine problems may also include the thermostat and cooling pump. This engine tends to consume more oil at higher mileages. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.61 m | 4.76 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.44 m | |
|
BMW 3 series is smaller. BMW 3 series is 14 cm shorter than the Mazda 6, 1 cm narrower, while the height of BMW 3 series is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 440 litres | 519 litres | |
|
Mazda 6 has more luggage space. BMW 3 series has 79 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.8 metres less than that of the Mazda 6, which means BMW 3 series can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`810 | 1`940 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| BMW 3 series has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 6 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than BMW 3 series, so BMW 3 series quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 400 | 4800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |