Chevrolet Spark 2013 vs Mazda 2 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 68 HP | 95 HP | |
| Torque: | 93 NM | 205 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15.5 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Mazda 2 is a more dynamic driving. Chevrolet Spark engine produces 27 HP less power than Mazda 2, whereas torque is 112 NM less than Mazda 2. Due to the lower power, Chevrolet Spark reaches 100 km/h speed 4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 | 4.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.9 l/100km | 5.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 2 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chevrolet Spark consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chevrolet Spark could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chevrolet Spark consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 35 litres | 43 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 1020 km in combined cycle | |
| 830 km on highway | 1160 km on highway | ||
| 590 km with real consumption | 860 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 2 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 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 2 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 16 years | 11 years | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Chevrolet Spark might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mazda 2 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: | 3.64 m | 3.90 m | |
| Width: | 1.60 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Chevrolet Spark is smaller, but higher. Chevrolet Spark is 26 cm shorter than the Mazda 2, 10 cm narrower, while the height of Chevrolet Spark is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 170 litres | 249 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
873 litres | 787 litres | |
| Chevrolet Spark has 79 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 2. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Chevrolet Spark (by 86 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Spark is 0.2 metres more than that of the Mazda 2. | |||
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`355 | 1`540 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | high | |
| Mazda 2 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chevrolet Spark has serious deffects in 305 percent more cases than Mazda 2, so Mazda 2 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2800 | 3600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Spark has
|
Mazda 2 has
| |