Mazda 3 2006 vs Fiat Bravo 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 109 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 255 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Fiat Bravo is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 11 HP less power than Fiat Bravo, whereas torque is 15 NM less than Fiat Bravo. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.8 | 5.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.0 l/100km | 5.9 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Fiat Bravo, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda 3 consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Fiat Bravo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1140 km in combined cycle | 1090 km in combined cycle | |
| 910 km with real consumption | 980 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 390'000 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 Fiat Bravo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 4 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. | |||
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.42 m | 4.34 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.50 m | |
| Mazda 3 is 8 cm longer than the Fiat Bravo, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | 400 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
635 litres | no data | |
|
Fiat Bravo has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mazda 3 has 100 litres less trunk space than the Fiat Bravo. This could mean that the Mazda 3 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.5 metres more than that of the Fiat Bravo, which means Mazda 3 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`825 | 1`300 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | low | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Fiat Bravo has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Fiat Bravo has
| |