Mazda 3 2011 vs Mercedes C class 2011
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 204 HP | |
| Torque: | 187 NM | 310 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 7.2 seconds | |
|
Mercedes C class is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 54 HP less power than Mercedes C class, whereas torque is 123 NM less than Mercedes C class. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 6.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 9.0 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mazda 3 consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes C class, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 180 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda 3 consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes C class. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 59 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 920 km in combined cycle | |
| 940 km on highway | 1150 km on highway | ||
| 660 km with real consumption | 650 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Mazda 3) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Mercedes C class) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 330'000 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 | 13 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 Mercedes E klase, Mercedes SLK | |
| 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 Mercedes C class 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: | 4.58 m | 4.59 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.45 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 3 is 1 cm shorter than the Mercedes C class, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 475 litres | |
|
Mercedes C class has more luggage space. Mazda 3 has 45 litres less trunk space than the Mercedes C class. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.4 metres less than that of the Mercedes C class, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`820 | 2`020 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mercedes C class has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5000 | 9200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Mercedes C klase has
| |