Honda Civic 2001 vs Mazda 3 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 200 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 196 NM | 187 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.8 seconds | 9 seconds | |
|
Honda Civic is more dynamic to drive. Honda Civic engine produces 50 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 9 NM more than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power Honda Civic reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.9 | 8.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.4 l/100km | 8.5 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda Civic consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Honda Civic could require 105 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda Civic consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 560 km in combined cycle | 670 km in combined cycle | |
| 710 km on highway | 870 km on highway | ||
| 530 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| 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. | |||
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: | 11 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda MX-5, Mazda 5, Mazda CX-5 | |
| 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. | |||
| Mazda 3 2003 2.0 engine: The engine tends to idle unevenly. Engine problems may also include the thermostat and cooling pump. This engine tends to consume more oil at higher mileages. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.14 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Honda Civic is smaller. Honda Civic is 35 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Honda Civic is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 313 litres | 300 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
610 litres | 635 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Honda Civic has 13 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. The Mazda 3 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 3 (by 25 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda Civic is 1.1 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 (kg): | 1`550 | 1`745 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Honda Civic has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.3/10 | 8.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda Civic has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |