Mazda 3 2003 vs Seat Toledo 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Mazda 3) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Seat Toledo) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 235 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
| Mazda 3 engine produces 5 HP less power than Seat Toledo, whereas torque is 90 NM less than Seat Toledo. Despite less power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 5.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 5.5 l/100km | |
|
The Seat Toledo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 2.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Seat Toledo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 330 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 2.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Seat Toledo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 1100 km in combined cycle | |
| 910 km on highway | 1340 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 1000 km with real consumption | ||
| Seat Toledo 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 | 560'000 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 Seat Toledo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 16 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda Xedos 6, Mazda MX-3 | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Audi A6, Seat Alhambra, Seat Leon | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| 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 | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.44 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 3 is 5 cm longer than the Seat Toledo, 2 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 3 is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 413 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
675 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.6 metres less than that of the Seat Toledo, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`675 | 1`400 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Seat Toledo has serious deffects in 85 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Seat Toledo has
| |