Mazda 3 2011 vs Ford Focus 2011
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 150 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.2 seconds | 12.4 seconds | |
| Mazda 3 and Ford Focus have the same engine power, but Mazda 3 torque is 5 NM less than Ford Focus. Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 6.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Focus is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Focus, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 60 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Focus. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 850 km in combined cycle | 910 km in combined cycle | |
| 1050 km on highway | 1120 km on highway | ||
| 740 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford Focus gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 460'000 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 Ford Focus engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 16 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Ford C-Max, Ford Fiesta, Ford B-Max | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.58 m | 4.53 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.48 m | |
| Mazda 3 is 5 cm longer than the Ford Focus, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 475 litres | |
|
Ford Focus has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mazda 3 has 45 litres less trunk space than the Ford Focus. This could mean that the Mazda 3 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.6 metres less than that of the Ford Focus, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`745 | 1`825 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | below average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Focus has serious deffects in 80 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5200 | 4000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Ford Focus has
| |