Mazda 3 2011 vs Opel Astra 2010

 
Mazda 3
2011 - 2013
Opel Astra
2010 - 2012
Gearbox: ManualManual
Engine: 2.3 Petrol2.0 Diesel
Camshaft drive: Timing chainTiming 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: 260 HP160 HP
Torque: 380 NM350 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 6.1 seconds9 seconds
Mazda 3 is more dynamic to drive.
Mazda 3 engine produces 100 HP more power than Opel Astra, whereas torque is 30 NM more than Opel Astra. Thanks to more power Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.9 seconds faster.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 9.64.9
Real fuel consumption: 10.2 l/100km6.5 l/100km
The Opel Astra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
By specification Mazda 3 consumes 4.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Opel Astra, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 705 litres more fuel.
By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 3.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Opel Astra.
Fuel tank capacity: 60 litres56 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 620 km in combined cycle1140 km in combined cycle
800 km on highway1360 km on highway
580 km with real consumption860 km with real consumption
Opel Astra gets more mileage on one fuel tank.
Ground clearance: 145 mm (5.7 inches)160 mm (6.3 inches)
Because of the higher ground clearance, Opel Astra 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 Opel Astra version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions.

Engines

Average engine lifespan: 320'000 km350'000 km
Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used.
Engine production duration: 8 years7 years
Engine spread: Used also on Mazda CX-7Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Opel Zafira, Opel Insignia
In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Opel Astra might be a better choice in this respect.
Hydraulic tappets: noyes
The Opel Astra 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: 4.51 m4.42 m
Width: 1.77 m1.81 m
Height: 1.46 m1.51 m
Mazda 3 is 9 cm longer than the Opel Astra, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 5 cm lower.
Trunk capacity: 300 litres370 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
1360 litres1235 litres
Despite its longer length, Mazda 3 has 70 litres less trunk space than the Opel Astra. 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 125 litres).
Turning diameter: 11 meters11.4 meters
The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.4 metres less than that of the Opel Astra, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces.
Gross weight (kg): 1`9252`065
Safety: no datano data
Quality:
high

average
Mazda 3 has fewer problems.
According to annual technical inspection data Opel Astra has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better
Average price (€): 52003800
Pros and Cons: Mazda 3 has
  • timing chain engine
  • more power
  • more dynamic
  • fewer faults
Opel Astra has
  • timing belt engine
  • lower fuel consumption
  • more full fuel tank mileage
  • higher ground clearance
  • longer expected engine lifespan
  • roomier boot
  • lower price
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv