Mazda 3 2019 vs Skoda Octavia 2019
| Body: | Sedan | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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: | Manual | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 122 HP | 190 HP | |
| Torque: | 213 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 6.9 seconds | |
|
Skoda Octavia is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 68 HP less power than Skoda Octavia, whereas torque is 107 NM less than Skoda Octavia. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 | 7.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.4 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 2.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Octavia, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 330 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Octavia. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 610 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km with real consumption | 590 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. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 135 mm (5.3 inches) | 143 mm (5.6 inches) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.66 m | 4.69 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.83 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.47 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 3 is 3 cm shorter than the Skoda Octavia, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 450 litres | 600 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1138 litres | 1555 litres | |
|
Skoda Octavia has more luggage space. Mazda 3 has 150 litres less trunk space than the Skoda Octavia. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Skoda Octavia (by 417 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 1 metres more than that of the Skoda Octavia, which means Mazda 3 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`869 kg | 2`031 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`358 kg | 1`469 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 511 kg | 562 kg | |
| Mazda 3 load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 10 procentiem less than Skoda Octavia. Therefore, Skoda Octavia is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | |||
| The Skoda Octavia scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | low | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 15 000 | 15 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Skoda Octavia has
| |