Mazda 3 2009 vs Fiat Bravo 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.9 Diesel | |
| 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: | 105 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 255 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.2 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Fiat Bravo is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 15 HP less power than Fiat Bravo, whereas torque is 110 NM less than Fiat Bravo. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.3 | 5.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.5 l/100km | 5.9 l/100km | |
|
The Fiat Bravo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Fiat Bravo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 150 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 1.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Fiat Bravo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 870 km in combined cycle | 1090 km in combined cycle | |
| 730 km with real consumption | 980 km with real consumption | ||
| Fiat Bravo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 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: | 16 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.46 m | 4.34 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.50 m | |
| Mazda 3 is 12 cm longer than the Fiat Bravo, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 340 litres | 400 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1360 litres | no data | |
|
Fiat Bravo has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mazda 3 has 60 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: | 10.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`770 | 1`300 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | high | low | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Fiat Bravo has serious deffects in 155 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4200 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Fiat Bravo has
| |