Chevrolet Epica 2006 vs Mazda 6 2007
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 2.0 - 2.5 | 1.8 - 3.7 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 141 - 156 HP | 120 - 272 HP | |
| Torque: | 195 - 320 NM | 165 - 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 - 10.1 seconds | 8 - 11.3 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.1 - 9.3 | 5.6 - 11.0 | |
|
Chevrolet Epica petrol engines consumes on average 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than Mazda 6. On average, Chevrolet Epica equipped with diesel engines consume 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.80 m | 4.78 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.44 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Chevrolet Epica is 2 cm longer than the Mazda 6, width is practically the same , while the height of Chevrolet Epica is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 480 litres | 519 litres | |
|
Mazda 6 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Chevrolet Epica has 39 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 6. This could mean that the Chevrolet Epica uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Epica is 0.6 metres less than that of the Mazda 6, which means Chevrolet Epica can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`985 | ~ 1`965 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Epica has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |