Mazda 3 2011 vs Mazda 6 2010
| Body: | Sedan | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 155 HP | |
| Torque: | 191 NM | 193 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Mazda 6 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 5 HP less power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 2 NM less than Mazda 6. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 7.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 8.2 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.4 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 60 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 0.1 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 | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 1030 km on highway | 1160 km on highway | ||
| 670 km with real consumption | 780 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | 165 mm (6.5 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 6 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 6 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 13 years | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.58 m | 4.76 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Mazda 3 is smaller, but slightly higher. Mazda 3 is 18 cm shorter than the Mazda 6, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 510 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1702 litres | |
|
Mazda 6 has more luggage space. Mazda 3 has 80 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.4 metres less than that of the Mazda 6, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`820 | 1`955 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 6 has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5200 | 4000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |