Mazda 3 2019 vs Alfa Romeo Giulia 2016
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Diesel | 2.1 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 116 HP | 180 HP | |
| Torque: | 270 NM | 450 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.1 seconds | 7.1 seconds | |
|
Alfa Romeo Giulia is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 64 HP less power than Alfa Romeo Giulia, whereas torque is 180 NM less than Alfa Romeo Giulia. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.6 | 4.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.9 l/100km | 6.3 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Alfa Romeo Giulia, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 60 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda 3 consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Alfa Romeo Giulia. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1100 km in combined cycle | 1380 km in combined cycle | |
| 1210 km on highway | 1650 km on highway | ||
| 860 km with real consumption | 920 km with real consumption | ||
| Alfa Romeo Giulia gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Mazda 3) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Alfa Romeo Giulia) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.66 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.87 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.43 m | |
| Mazda 3 is 2 cm longer than the Alfa Romeo Giulia, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 450 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`914 | 1`445 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda 3 scores higher in safety tests, but Alfa Romeo Giulia is better rated in child safety tests. The Mazda 3 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | low | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 16 600 | 29 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Alfa Romeo Giulia has
| |