Mazda 3 2009 vs BMW 3 series 2008
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 143 HP | |
| Torque: | 187 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 7 HP more power than BMW 3 series, but torque is 3 NM less than BMW 3 series. Despite the higher power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.9 | 6.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.0 l/100km | 8.8 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 225 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 980 km in combined cycle | |
| 850 km on highway | 1210 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 710 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW 3 series gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Ground clearance: | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | 144 mm (5.7 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: | 420'000 km | 350'000 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: | 13 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda MX-5, Mazda 5, Mazda CX-5 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 1 sērija | |
| 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: | no | yes | |
| The BMW 3 series 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 2009 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. BMW 3 sērija 2008 2.0 engine: The BMW N43 engine is built around a lightweight alloy cylinder block with a twin-cam, 16-valve head. It uses a dual-pump fuel delivery system—one located inside the tank to transfer fuel and supply the high-pressure pump, which then boosts fuel pressure up to 200 bar. Notably, the system lacks a fine fuel filter and relies only on a ... More about BMW 3 sērija 2008 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 4.53 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Mazda 3 is smaller, but higher. Mazda 3 is 4 cm shorter than the BMW 3 series, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 460 litres | |
|
BMW 3 series has more luggage space. Mazda 3 has 30 litres less trunk space than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.6 metres less than that of the BMW 3 series, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`770 | 1`910 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3200 | 5800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |