Mazda 3 2006 vs Audi A3 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 | 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 155 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 11.1 seconds | |
|
Audi A3 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 11 HP less power than Audi A3, whereas torque is 10 NM less than Audi A3. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 6.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km | |
|
The Audi A3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi A3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 60 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 Audi A3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 790 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 1030 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| Audi A3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 160 mm (6.3 inches) | 113 mm (4.4 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 3 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Mazda 3 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 350'000 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 | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda Xedos 6, Mazda MX-3 | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Mazda 3 2006 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 2006 1.6 engine Audi A3 2004 1.6 engine: Owners of vehicles with this engine often report difficulties starting in cold weather. Carbon buildup tends to cause sticking in the intake valves, throttle body, and EGR valve, leading to performance ... More about Audi A3 2004 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.42 m | 4.29 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.42 m | |
| Mazda 3 is 13 cm longer than the Audi A3, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 3 is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | 370 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
635 litres | 1120 litres | |
|
Audi A3 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mazda 3 has 70 litres less trunk space than the Audi A3. This could mean that the Mazda 3 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Audi A3 (by 485 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.2 metres more than that of the Audi A3. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`725 | 1`825 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Audi A3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 3 has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Audi A3, so Audi A3 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 3200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Audi A3 has
| |