Kia RIO 2003 vs Mazda 3 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 97 HP | 84 HP | |
| Torque: | 132 NM | 122 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.6 seconds | 14.9 seconds | |
|
Kia RIO is more dynamic to drive. Kia RIO engine produces 13 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 10 NM more than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power Kia RIO reaches 100 km/h speed 3.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 6.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Kia RIO consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Kia RIO could require 60 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 630 km in combined cycle | 820 km in combined cycle | |
| 760 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 590 km with real consumption | 720 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: | 320'000 km | 330'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Mazda 2 | |
| 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: | yes | no | |
| The Kia RIO 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 2006 1.4 engine: The engine is generally robust, but the use of poor-quality fuel can lead to increased burn formation. Idling speeds tend to be unstable. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.24 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.47 m | |
|
Kia RIO is smaller. Kia RIO is 25 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 10 cm narrower, while the height of Kia RIO is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 326 litres | 413 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1285 litres | |
|
Mazda 3 has more luggage space. Kia RIO has 87 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.5 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Kia RIO is 1.4 metres less than that of the Mazda 3, which means Kia RIO can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`500 | 1`715 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Kia RIO has serious deffects in 150 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Kia RIO has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |