Mazda 3 2011 vs BMW 1 series 2005
Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
---|---|---|---|
Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 150 HP | 129 HP | |
Torque: | 191 NM | 180 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 9.4 seconds | |
Mazda 3 engine produces 21 HP more power than BMW 1 series, whereas torque is 11 NM more than BMW 1 series. Despite the higher power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 7.3 | |
Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 7.9 l/100km | |
By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 1 series, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda 3 consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 1 series. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 50 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
1030 km on highway | 870 km on highway | ||
670 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
Mazda 3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
Front-wheel drive cars (Mazda 3) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (BMW 1 series) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
Engine production duration: | 13 years | 11 years | |
Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda MX-5, Mazda 5, Mazda CX-5 | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including BMW 3 sērija, BMW X3, BMW X1, BMW Z4 | |
In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
The BMW 1 series 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. | |||
Mazda 3 2011 2.0 engine: The engine tends to idle unevenly. Engine problems may also include the thermostat and cooling pump. This engine tends to consume more oil at higher mileages. | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.46 m | 4.23 m | |
Width: | 1.76 m | 1.75 m | |
Height: | 1.47 m | 1.43 m | |
Mazda 3 is larger. Mazda 3 is 23 cm longer than the BMW 1 series, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 3 is 4 cm higher. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 340 litres | 330 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1360 litres | 1150 litres | |
Mazda 3 has 10 litres more trunk space than the BMW 1 series. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 3 (by 210 litres). | |||
Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11 meters | |
The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.6 metres less than that of the BMW 1 series, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | 1`835 | 1`760 | |
Safety: | no data | ||
Quality: | high | average | |
Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 1 series has serious deffects in 315 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
Average price (€): | 5000 | 3000 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
BMW 1 sērija has
| |