Mazda 3 2004 vs Mazda 3 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Petrol | 2.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 160 HP | 265 HP | |
| Torque: | 203 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 6.1 seconds | |
| Mazda 3 2004 engine produces 105 HP less power than Mazda 3 2006, whereas torque is 177 NM less than Mazda 3 2006. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | no data | 9.7 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 320'000 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 3 2004 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 16 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda Tribute | Used also on Mazda CX-7 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 3 2004 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Mazda 3 2004 2.3 engine: The cooling system pump and thermostat, engine mounts (which can cause vibration), lambda sensor, and intake manifold adjuster are the most common problems with this engine. Mazda 3 2006 2.3 engine: Although the engine has a chain, its capacity is quite limited. The engine also requires high quality fuel and tends to use more oil at higher mileages. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 4.44 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.46 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 3 2004 is 5 cm longer than the Mazda 3 2006, width is practically the same also the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 481 litres | 300 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
878 litres | 1229 litres | |
| Mazda 3 2004 has 181 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3 2006. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 3 2006 (by 351 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 2004 is 0.6 metres less than that of the Mazda 3 2006, which means Mazda 3 2004 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`910 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 2000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.2/10 | 8.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |