Mazda 3 2011 vs Volkswagen Golf 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| 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 | 102 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 148 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.2 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Golf is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 3 HP more power than Volkswagen Golf, but torque is 3 NM less than Volkswagen Golf. Despite the higher power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 7.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Golf, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 105 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Golf. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 850 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 1050 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 740 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | 150 mm (5.9 inches) | |
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 Volkswagen Golf engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 16 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Touran, Audi A3 | |
| 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 Volkswagen Golf 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: | 4.46 m | 4.20 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.48 m | |
| Mazda 3 is 26 cm longer than the Volkswagen Golf, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 340 litres | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1360 litres | 1305 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Mazda 3 has 10 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Golf. 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 Mazda 3 (by 55 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.6 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Golf, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`770 | 1`780 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Golf has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5200 | 4400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Volkswagen Golf has
| |