Mazda 3 2013 vs Mazda 6 2012
| Body: | Hatchback | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 187 HP | 192 HP | |
| Torque: | 251 NM | 256 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 7.8 seconds | |
| Mazda 3 engine produces 5 HP less power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 5 NM less than Mazda 6. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 135 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda 3 consumes 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 980 km in combined cycle | |
| 850 km on highway | 1240 km on highway | ||
| 730 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 12 years | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.51 m | 4.87 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Mazda 3 is smaller, but slightly higher. Mazda 3 is 36 cm shorter than the Mazda 6, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 364 litres | 489 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1263 litres | no data | |
|
Mazda 6 has more luggage space. Mazda 3 has 125 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.2 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | no 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 (€): | 7000 | 7000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |