Mazda 3 2010 vs Mercedes C class 2011
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 2.1 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 109 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 270 NM | 300 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 10.8 seconds | |
|
Mercedes C class is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 11 HP less power than Mercedes C class, whereas torque is 30 NM less than Mercedes C class. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.4 | 4.9 | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 3 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes C class, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 59 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1240 km in combined cycle | 1200 km in combined cycle | |
| 1410 km on highway | 1370 km on highway | ||
| 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) | 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 (Mercedes C class) 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: | 4.58 m | 4.59 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.43 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 3 is 1 cm shorter than the Mercedes C class, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 475 litres | |
|
Mercedes C class has more luggage space. Mazda 3 has 45 litres less trunk space than the Mercedes C class. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.4 metres less than that of the Mercedes C class, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`815 | 2`105 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mercedes C class scores higher in safety tests, butMazda 3 is better rated in child safety tests. The Mercedes C class scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | high | average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mercedes C class has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3200 | 7600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Mercedes C klase has
| |