Mazda 2 2010 vs Mazda 3 2013

Mazda 2
2010 - 2015
Mazda 3
2013 - 2016
Body: HatchbackSedan
The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area.
Gearbox: ManualManual
Engine: 1.3 Petrol1.5 Petrol
Camshaft drive: Timing chainTiming chain


Power: 75 HP120 HP
Torque: 119 NM150 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 14.9 seconds10.3 seconds
Mazda 3 is a more dynamic driving.
Mazda 2 engine produces 45 HP less power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 31 NM less than Mazda 3. Due to the lower power, Mazda 2 reaches 100 km/h speed 4.6 seconds later.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 5.15.3
Real fuel consumption: 6.0 l/100km6.6 l/100km
The Mazda 2 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
By specification Mazda 2 consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that by driving the Mazda 2 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel.
By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 2 consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3.
Fuel tank capacity: 43 litres51 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 840 km in combined cycle960 km in combined cycle
1000 km on highway1180 km on highway
710 km with real consumption770 km with real consumption
Mazda 3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank.
Ground clearance: 150 mm (5.9 inches)155 mm (6.1 inches)


Average engine lifespan: 330'000 km350'000 km
Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used.
Engine production duration: 13 years11 years
Engine spread: Used also on Mazda 3Used 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.
Hydraulic tappets: noyes
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.


Length: 3.92 m4.59 m
Width: 1.70 m1.80 m
Height: 1.48 m1.45 m
Mazda 2 is smaller, but slightly higher.
Mazda 2 is 67 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 10 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 2 is 3 cm higher.
Trunk capacity: 250 litres419 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
787 litresno data
Mazda 3 has more luggage space.
Mazda 2 has 169 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 3.
Turning diameter: 9.8 meters10.6 meters
The turning circle of the Mazda 2 is 0.8 metres less than that of the Mazda 3, which means Mazda 2 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces.
Gross weight (kg): 1`4851`800
Mazda 3 scores higher in safety tests. The Mazda 3 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests.

Mazda 2 has fewer problems.
According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 3 has serious deffects in 55 percent more cases than Mazda 2, so Mazda 2 quality is probably significantly better
Average price (€): 320011 600
Pros and Cons: Mazda 2 has
  • lower fuel consumption
  • better manoeuvrability
  • fewer faults
  • lower price
Mazda 3 has
  • more power
  • more dynamic
  • more full fuel tank mileage
  • roomier boot
  • higher safety
  • better safety assist technologies
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: