Mazda 3 2016 vs Mazda 2 2010
| 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 | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 95 HP | |
| Torque: | 270 NM | 205 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 3 engine produces 10 HP more power than Mazda 2, whereas torque is 65 NM more than Mazda 2. Thanks to more power Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 3.8 | 4.2 | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 3 consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 43 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1340 km in combined cycle | 1020 km in combined cycle | |
| 1450 km on highway | 1160 km on highway | ||
| Mazda 3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | 150 mm (5.9 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 330'000 km | 480'000 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 2 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda 2 | Used only for this car | |
| 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: | 4.59 m | 3.90 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Mazda 3 is larger, but slightly lower. Mazda 3 is 69 cm longer than the Mazda 2, 10 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 3 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 419 litres | 249 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 787 litres | |
|
Mazda 3 has more luggage capacity. Mazda 3 has 170 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 2. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.8 metres more than that of the Mazda 2, which means Mazda 3 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`870 | 1`540 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda 3 scores higher in safety tests, but Mazda 2 is better rated in child safety tests. The Mazda 3 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 2 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably slightly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 11 600 | 3600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Mazda 2 has
| |