Mazda 3 2013 vs Mazda 2 2010

 
Mazda 3
2013 - 2016
Mazda 2
2010 - 2015
Body: SedanHatchback
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: 1.5 Petrol1.5 Petrol
Camshaft drive: Timing chainTiming chain

Performance

Power: 120 HP102 HP
Torque: 150 NM133 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 10.3 seconds10.7 seconds
Mazda 3 is more dynamic to drive.
Mazda 3 engine produces 18 HP more power than Mazda 2, whereas torque is 17 NM more than Mazda 2. Thanks to more power Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds faster.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 5.35.8
Real fuel consumption: 6.6 l/100km6.9 l/100km
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel.
By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2.
Fuel tank capacity: 51 litres43 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 960 km in combined cycle740 km in combined cycle
1180 km on highway890 km on highway
770 km with real consumption620 km with real consumption
Mazda 3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank.
Ground clearance: 155 mm (6.1 inches)150 mm (5.9 inches)

Engines

Average engine lifespan: 350'000 km390'000 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 2 engine could be longer.
Engine production duration: 11 years13 years
Engine spread: Used also on Mazda 2Used 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. Mazda 3 might be a better choice in this respect.
Hydraulic tappets: yesno
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.

Dimensions

Length: 4.59 m3.92 m
Width: 1.80 m1.70 m
Height: 1.45 m1.48 m
Mazda 3 is larger, but slightly lower.
Mazda 3 is 67 cm longer than the Mazda 2, 10 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 3 is 3 cm lower.
Trunk capacity: 419 litres250 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
no data787 litres
Mazda 3 has more luggage capacity.
Mazda 3 has 169 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 2.
Turning diameter: 10.6 meters9.8 meters
The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.8 metres more than that of the Mazda 2, which means Mazda 3 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces.
Gross weight (kg): 1`8001`490
Safety:
Mazda 3 scores higher in safety tests, but Mazda 2 is better rated in child safety tests. The Mazda 3 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests.
Quality:
average

high
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 (€): 11 6003600
Pros and Cons: Mazda 3 has
  • more power
  • lower fuel consumption
  • more full fuel tank mileage
  • roomier boot
  • higher safety
  • better safety assist technologies
Mazda 2 has
  • longer expected engine lifespan
  • better manoeuvrability
  • higher children safety
  • fewer faults
  • lower price
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv