Honda Civic 2017 vs Mazda 3 2016
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 182 HP | 165 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.2 seconds | 8.2 seconds | |
| Honda Civic engine produces 17 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 10 NM more than Mazda 3. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 5.8 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 51 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 790 km in combined cycle | 870 km in combined cycle | |
| 930 km on highway | 1060 km on highway | ||
| Mazda 3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 129 mm (5.1 inches) | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 3 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 3 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
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 3 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Honda CR-V, Honda Accord | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda MX-5, Mazda CX-5, Mazda CX-3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mazda 3 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. | |||
| Mazda 3 2016 2.0 engine: This engine is not well-suited for low-quality fuel, as it quickly clogs the fuel system. The use of substandard fuel often leads to the failure of expensive ignition coils, resulting in significant repair ... More about Mazda 3 2016 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.52 m | 4.47 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.45 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Honda Civic is 5 cm longer than the Mazda 3, width is practically the same , while the height of Honda Civic is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 420 litres | 364 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1209 litres | 1334 litres | |
| Honda Civic has 56 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 3 (by 125 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda Civic is 1.2 metres more than that of the Mazda 3, which means Honda Civic can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`790 kg | 1`815 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`232 kg | 1`334 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 558 kg | 481 kg | |
| Honda Civic load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 14 procentiem more than Mazda 3. Therefore, Honda Civic is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Honda Civic has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 3 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Honda Civic, so Honda Civic quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 28 200 | 9400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda Civic has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |