Chevrolet Epica 2007 vs Mazda 6 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 330 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Chevrolet Epica is more dynamic to drive. Chevrolet Epica engine produces 10 HP more power than Mazda 6, but torque is 10 NM less than Mazda 6. Thanks to more power Chevrolet Epica reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.1 | 5.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chevrolet Epica consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chevrolet Epica could require 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chevrolet Epica consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1060 km in combined cycle | 1140 km in combined cycle | |
| 940 km with real consumption | 960 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 530'000 km | 390'000 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 Chevrolet Epica engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Chevrolet Captiva, Opel Antara, Chevrolet Cruze | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda 5 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Chevrolet Epica might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Chevrolet Epica 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: | 4.80 m | 4.76 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.44 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Chevrolet Epica is 4 cm longer than the Mazda 6, 1 cm wider, 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): | no data | 2`035 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Epica has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |