Mazda 3 2006 vs Mazda 3 2009
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Petrol | 2.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 265 HP | 260 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.1 seconds | 6.1 seconds | |
| Mazda 3 2006 engine produces 5 HP more power than Mazda 3 2009, the torque is the same for both cars. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.7 | 9.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.6 l/100km | 10.1 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 2009 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 2006 consumes 0.1 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 15 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 2006 consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3 2009. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 560 km in combined cycle | 620 km in combined cycle | |
| 730 km on highway | 800 km on highway | ||
| 510 km with real consumption | 590 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 3 2009 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 160 mm (6.3 inches) | 145 mm (5.7 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 3 2006 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 2006 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 320'000 km | 320'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 8 years | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.44 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.47 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 3 2006 is 7 cm shorter than the Mazda 3 2009, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 2006 is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | 340 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1229 litres | 1360 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 131 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.4 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`910 | 1`925 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | high | high | |
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 4200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |