Mazda 3 2006 vs Mazda 6 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 84 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 122 NM | 165 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.9 seconds | 10.7 seconds | |
|
Mazda 6 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 36 HP less power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 43 NM less than Mazda 6. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 4.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 7.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 150 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 1080 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
| Ground clearance: | 160 mm (6.3 inches) | 130 mm (5.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 3 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 Mazda 3 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 330'000 km | 390'000 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 6 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda 2 | 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. | |||
| Mazda 3 2006 1.4 engine: The engine is generally robust, but the use of poor-quality fuel can lead to increased burn formation. Idling speeds tend to be unstable. Mazda 6 2005 1.8 engine: The engine often has an unstable idle speed. The thermostat, cooling pump, and alternator are weak points. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 4.69 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Mazda 3 is smaller, but slightly higher. Mazda 3 is 20 cm shorter than the Mazda 6, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 3 is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 413 litres | 501 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1285 litres | no data | |
|
Mazda 6 has more luggage space. Mazda 3 has 88 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.1 metres more than that of the Mazda 6. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`715 | 1`825 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Mazda 6 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 3 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Mazda 6, so Mazda 6 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2600 | 1400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.8/10 | 7.7/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |