Mazda 3 2003 vs Peugeot 207 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| 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: | 150 HP | 109 HP | |
| Torque: | 187 NM | 147 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 3 engine produces 41 HP more power than Peugeot 207, whereas torque is 40 NM more than Peugeot 207. Thanks to more power Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.2 | 7.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.5 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Peugeot 207 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Peugeot 207, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 180 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Peugeot 207. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 870 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 620 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda MX-5, Mazda 5, Mazda CX-5 | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen Xsara, Citroen C3, Peugeot 206 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Peugeot 207 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Peugeot 207 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 4.03 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.47 m | |
|
Mazda 3 is larger, but slightly lower. Mazda 3 is 46 cm longer than the Peugeot 207, 4 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 3 is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | 270 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
635 litres | 923 litres | |
| Mazda 3 has 30 litres more trunk space than the Peugeot 207. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Peugeot 207 (by 288 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.1 metres less than that of the Peugeot 207. | |||
| Power steering: | Electric power steering | Hydraulic power steering | |
| Electric power steering is simpler, quieter, more fuel-efficient, more configurable and provides additional features such as auto-steering for lane assist and parking. The disadvantages of electric power steering are possible overheating under prolonged load conditions and insufficient feedback (feeling) during steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`745 | 1`670 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Peugeot 207 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 2000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.2/10 | 6.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Peugeot 207 has
| |