Mazda 3 2013 vs Nissan Pulsar 2014
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 165 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9 seconds | 12.7 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 3 engine produces 35 HP more power than Nissan Pulsar, whereas torque is 45 NM more than Nissan Pulsar. Thanks to more power Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.2 | 5.1 | |
|
The Nissan Pulsar is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 3 consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Pulsar, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 165 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 46 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 860 km on highway | 1040 km on highway | ||
| Nissan Pulsar gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Mazda 3 2013 2.0 engine: This engine is not well-suited for low-quality fuel, as it quickly clogs the fuel system. The use of substandard fuel often leads to the failure of expensive ignition coils, resulting in significant repair ... More about Mazda 3 2013 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.47 m | 4.39 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.52 m | |
|
Mazda 3 is larger, but lower. Mazda 3 is 8 cm longer than the Nissan Pulsar, 3 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 3 is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 364 litres | 385 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1263 litres | no data | |
|
Nissan Pulsar has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mazda 3 has 21 litres less trunk space than the Nissan Pulsar. 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: | 10.6 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.4 metres more than that of the Nissan Pulsar, which means Mazda 3 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`835 | 1`750 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda 3 scores higher in safety tests, but Nissan Pulsar is better rated in child safety tests. The Mazda 3 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Pulsar has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7800 | 6400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Nissan Pulsar has
| |