Mazda 3 2013 vs Mazda 6 2012

 
Mazda 3
2013 - 2016
Mazda 6
2012 - 2015
Body: HatchbackSedan
The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area.
Gearbox: AutomaticAutomatic
Engine: 1.5 Petrol2.0 Petrol
Camshaft drive: Timing chainTiming chain

Performance

Power: 120 HP150 HP
Torque: 150 NM210 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 11.7 seconds10.6 seconds
Mazda 6 is a more dynamic driving.
Mazda 3 engine produces 30 HP less power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 60 NM less than Mazda 6. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds later.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 5.86.1
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
Mazda 3 consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel.
Fuel tank capacity: 51 litres62 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 870 km in combined cycle1010 km in combined cycle
Mazda 6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank.

Engines

Average engine lifespan: 350'000 km420'000 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 Mazda 6 engine could be longer.
Engine production duration: 11 years12 years
Engine spread: Used also on Mazda 2Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda MX-5, Mazda CX-5, Mazda CX-3
In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 6 might be a better choice in this respect.

Dimensions

Length: 4.47 m4.87 m
Width: 1.80 m1.84 m
Height: 1.45 m1.45 m
Mazda 3 is smaller.
Mazda 3 is 41 cm shorter than the Mazda 6, 5 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly.
Trunk capacity: 364 litres483 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
1263 litresno data
Mazda 6 has more luggage space.
Mazda 3 has 119 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 6.
Turning diameter: 10.6 meters10.2 meters
The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.4 metres more than that of the Mazda 6, which means Mazda 3 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces.
Gross weight (kg): no datano data
Safety:
Mazda 3 is better rated in child safety tests.
Quality:
average

above average
Mazda 6 has fewer problems.
According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 3 has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Mazda 6, so Mazda 6 quality is probably better
Average price (€): 76006800
Pros and Cons: Mazda 3 has
  • lower fuel consumption
  • higher children safety
Mazda 6 has
  • more power
  • more dynamic
  • more full fuel tank mileage
  • longer expected engine lifespan
  • roomier boot
  • fewer faults
  • lower price
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv