Mazda 3 2013 vs Opel Astra 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 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: | 150 HP | 180 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 230 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9 seconds | 8.5 seconds | |
|
Opel Astra is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 30 HP less power than Opel Astra, whereas torque is 20 NM less than Opel Astra. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.2 | 6.8 | |
| Mazda 3 consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Astra, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 820 km in combined cycle | |
| 860 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| Ground clearance: | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | 165 mm (6.5 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 | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda MX-5, Mazda CX-5, Mazda CX-3 | Used also on Opel Insignia | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mazda 3 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: | 4.47 m | 4.42 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.51 m | |
| Mazda 3 is 5 cm longer than the Opel Astra, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 364 litres | 370 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1263 litres | 1235 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Mazda 3 has 6 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 28 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.9 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`835 | 1`965 | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Mazda 3 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Mazda 3 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Opel Astra, so Mazda 3 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 7800 | 5800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Opel Astra has
| |