Mazda 3 2006 vs Mazda 3 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 260 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 187 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.1 seconds | 9 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 2006 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 3 2006 engine produces 110 HP more power than Mazda 3 2003, whereas torque is 193 NM more than Mazda 3 2003. Thanks to more power Mazda 3 2006 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.7 | 8.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.2 l/100km | 8.5 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 2003 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 2006 consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3 2003, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 2006 could require 225 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 2006 consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3 2003. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 560 km in combined cycle | 670 km in combined cycle | |
| 730 km on highway | 870 km on highway | ||
| 530 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 3 2003 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 320'000 km | 420'000 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 2003 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda CX-7 | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda MX-5, Mazda 5, Mazda CX-5 | |
| 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 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Mazda 3 2006 2.3 engine: Although the engine has a chain, its capacity is quite limited. The engine also requires high quality fuel and tends to use more oil at higher mileages. Mazda 3 2003 2.0 engine: The engine tends to idle unevenly. Engine problems may also include the thermostat and cooling pump. This engine tends to consume more oil at higher mileages. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.46 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 3 2006 and Mazda 3 2003 are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 413 litres | 413 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1285 litres | 675 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 2006 is 0.6 metres more than that of the Mazda 3 2003, which means Mazda 3 2006 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`910 | 1`725 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Average price (€): | 2600 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.8/10 | 8.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |