Mazda 3 2003 vs Nissan Almera 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 98 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 136 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 13.1 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 3 engine produces 7 HP more power than Nissan Almera, whereas torque is 9 NM more than Nissan Almera. Thanks to more power Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 6.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Almera is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Almera, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Almera. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 910 km on highway | 1090 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 810 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan Almera gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 300'000 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 3 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 16 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda Xedos 6, Mazda MX-3 | Used only for this car | |
| 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. | |||
| Mazda 3 2003 1.6 engine: This engine is widely regarded as reliable, though it can develop certain issues over time. One of the most common problems is increased oil consumption, often starting after 120,000 km. This is frequently ... More about Mazda 3 2003 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 4.44 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Mazda 3 is larger. Mazda 3 is 5 cm longer than the Nissan Almera, 6 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 3 is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 413 litres | 393 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
675 litres | no data | |
| Mazda 3 has 20 litres more trunk space than the Nissan Almera. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.1 metres less than that of the Nissan Almera. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`675 | 1`690 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Almera has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.2/10 | 9.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Nissan Almera has
| |