Mazda 3 2003 vs Toyota Corolla 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 150 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Toyota Corolla is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 5 HP less power than Toyota Corolla, whereas torque is 5 NM less than Toyota Corolla. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 7.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Corolla is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Corolla, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 30 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Corolla. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 910 km on highway | 930 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 760 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 280'000 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 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 16 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda Xedos 6, Mazda MX-3 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Corolla Verso | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mazda 3 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| Mazda 3 2003 1.6 engine: This engine is widely regarded as reliable, though it can develop certain issues over time. One of the most common problems is increased oil consumption, often starting after 120,000 km. This is frequently ... More about Mazda 3 2003 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.42 m | 4.18 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Mazda 3 is larger, but slightly lower. Mazda 3 is 24 cm longer than the Toyota Corolla, 5 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 3 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
635 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.1 metres more than that of the Toyota Corolla. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`695 | 1`300 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Toyota Corolla has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 3 has serious deffects in 55 percent more cases than Toyota Corolla, so Toyota Corolla quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.2/10 | 8.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Toyota Corolla has
| |