Kia Ceed 2013 vs Mazda 3 2011
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 204 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 265 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.7 seconds | 12.2 seconds | |
|
Kia Ceed is more dynamic to drive. Kia Ceed engine produces 99 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 120 NM more than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power Kia Ceed reaches 100 km/h speed 4.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 6.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.0 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Kia Ceed consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Kia Ceed could require 180 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Kia Ceed consumes 1.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 53 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 850 km on highway | 1050 km on highway | ||
| 580 km with real consumption | 740 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: | 250'000 km | 350'000 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: | 14 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Kia Sportage, Hyundai Sonata, Hyundai Tucson, Hyundai Elantra | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Kia Ceed might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.31 m | 4.46 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.45 m | |
| Kia Ceed is 15 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 3 cm wider, while the height of Kia Ceed is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 380 litres | 340 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1318 litres | 1360 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Kia Ceed has 40 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 42 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Kia Ceed is 0.2 metres more than that of the Mazda 3. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`850 | 1`770 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Kia Ceed has serious deffects in 90 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5400 | 5000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Kia Ceed has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |