Mazda 3 2011 vs Mazda 6 2010

 
Mazda 3
2011 - 2013
Mazda 6
2010 - 2012
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: AutomaticManual
Engine: 1.6 Petrol1.8 Petrol
Camshaft drive: Timing chainTiming chain

Performance

Power: 105 HP120 HP
Torque: 145 NM165 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 13.1 seconds11.7 seconds
Mazda 6 is a more dynamic driving.
Mazda 3 engine produces 15 HP less power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 20 NM less than Mazda 6. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds later.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 7.46.5
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
Mazda 3 consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 135 litres more fuel.
Fuel tank capacity: 55 litres64 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 740 km in combined cycle980 km in combined cycle
910 km on highway1280 km on highway
Mazda 6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank.
Ground clearance: 155 mm (6.1 inches)165 mm (6.5 inches)
Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 6 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Mazda 6 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions.

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 6 engine could be longer.
Engine production duration: 16 years10 years
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.

Dimensions

Length: 4.58 m4.76 m
Width: 1.76 m1.80 m
Height: 1.47 m1.44 m
Mazda 3 is smaller, but slightly higher.
Mazda 3 is 18 cm shorter than the Mazda 6, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 3 cm higher.
Trunk capacity: 430 litres510 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
no data1702 litres
Mazda 6 has more luggage space.
Mazda 3 has 80 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 6.
Turning diameter: 10.4 meters11.8 meters
The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 1.4 metres less than that of the Mazda 6, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces.
Gross weight (kg): 1`7701`925
Safety: no datano data
Quality:
high

average
Mazda 3 has fewer problems.
According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 6 has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better
Average price (€): 50004200
Pros and Cons: Mazda 3 has
  • better manoeuvrability
  • fewer faults
Mazda 6 has
  • more power
  • more dynamic
  • lower fuel consumption
  • more full fuel tank mileage
  • higher ground clearance
  • longer expected engine lifespan
  • roomier boot
  • lower price
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv