Mazda 3 2006 vs Mazda 3 2009

 
Mazda 3
2006 - 2009
Mazda 3
2009 - 2011
Gearbox: ManualManual
Engine: 1.3 Petrol1.6 Petrol
Camshaft drive: Timing chainTiming chain

Performance

Power: 84 HP105 HP
Torque: 122 NM145 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 14.9 seconds12.2 seconds
Mazda 3 2009 is a more dynamic driving.
Mazda 3 2006 engine produces 21 HP less power than Mazda 3 2009, whereas torque is 23 NM less than Mazda 3 2009. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 2006 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.7 seconds later.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 6.76.3
Real fuel consumption: 7.6 l/100km7.5 l/100km
The Mazda 3 2009 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
By specification Mazda 3 2006 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3 2009, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 2006 could require 60 litres more fuel.
By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 2006 consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3 2009.
Fuel tank capacity: 55 litres55 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 820 km in combined cycle870 km in combined cycle
1000 km on highway1050 km on highway
720 km with real consumption730 km with real consumption
Mazda 3 2009 gets more mileage on one fuel tank.
Ground clearance: 160 mm (6.3 inches)155 mm (6.1 inches)

Engines

Average engine lifespan: 330'000 km350'000 km
Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used.
Engine production duration: 13 years16 years
Engine spread: Used also on Mazda 2Used 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.

Dimensions

Length: 4.42 m4.46 m
Width: 1.76 m1.76 m
Height: 1.46 m1.47 m
Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 3 2006 is 4 cm shorter than the Mazda 3 2009, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 3 2006 is 1 cm lower.
Trunk capacity: 300 litres340 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
635 litres1360 litres
Mazda 3 2009 has more luggage space.
Mazda 3 2006 has 40 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 3 2009. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 3 2009 (by 725 litres).
Turning diameter: 10.9 meters10.4 meters
The turning circle of the Mazda 3 2006 is 0.5 metres more than that of the Mazda 3 2009, which means Mazda 3 2006 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces.
Gross weight (kg): 1`7151`770
Safety:
Quality:
high

high
Average price (€): 18004200
Pros and Cons: Mazda 3 has
  • lower price
Mazda 3 has
  • more power
  • more dynamic
  • lower fuel consumption
  • more full fuel tank mileage
  • roomier boot
  • higher safety
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv