BMW 3 series 2010 vs Mazda 6 2010
| Body: | Coupe | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 3.0 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 270 NM | 226 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.7 seconds | 8.1 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is more dynamic to drive. BMW 3 series engine produces 48 HP more power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 44 NM more than Mazda 6. Thanks to more power BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 8.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.7 l/100km | 8.6 l/100km | |
|
By specification BMW 3 series consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that by driving the BMW 3 series over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, BMW 3 series consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 870 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 1100 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Ground clearance: | 143 mm (5.6 inches) | 165 mm (6.5 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 6 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 6 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 480'000 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 | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on BMW 5 sērija | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda Tribute | |
| 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 3.0 engine: Engine is relatively reliable. Most problems relate to the fuel injection system, spark plugs and coils, and the Vanos phase control system. Problems with the high pressure fuel pump were common in early model ... More about BMW 3 sērija 2010 3.0 engine | |||
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 | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`910 | no data | |
| 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
| |