Mazda 3 2006 vs Mitsubishi Lancer 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.8 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 | 143 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 178 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 11 seconds | |
| Mazda 3 engine produces 38 HP less power than Mitsubishi Lancer, whereas torque is 33 NM less than Mitsubishi Lancer. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 7.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 9.7 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Lancer, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 105 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 1.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Lancer. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 59 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 740 km in combined cycle | |
| 910 km on highway | 950 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 600 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 16 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Mazda Xedos 6, Mazda MX-3, Kia RIO, Kia Cerato, Kia Carens | Used also on Mitsubishi ASX | |
| 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: | 4.49 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.49 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 3 is 8 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Lancer, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 3 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 413 litres | 400 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1285 litres | no data | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Mazda 3 has 13 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Lancer. The Mitsubishi Lancer may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.9 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Lancer, which means Mazda 3 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`710 | 1`850 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 2800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.8/10 | 8.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Mitsubishi Lancer has
| |