Mazda 3 2013 vs Mazda 3 2009
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 165 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 187 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 2013 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 3 2013 engine produces 15 HP more power than Mazda 3 2009, whereas torque is 23 NM more than Mazda 3 2009. Thanks to more power Mazda 3 2013 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.2 | 7.9 | |
|
The Mazda 3 2013 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 3 2013 consumes 1.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3 2009, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 2013 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 255 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 1060 km on highway | 850 km on highway | ||
| Mazda 3 2013 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | |
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 | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda MX-5, Mazda CX-5, Mazda CX-3 | 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mazda 3 2013 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 2013 2.0 engine: This engine is not well-suited for low-quality fuel, as it quickly clogs the fuel system. The use of substandard fuel often leads to the failure of expensive ignition coils, resulting in significant repair ... More about Mazda 3 2013 2.0 engine 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.59 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.47 m | |
|
Mazda 3 2013 is larger, but slightly lower. Mazda 3 2013 is 10 cm longer than the Mazda 3 2009, 4 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 3 2013 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 419 litres | 430 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Mazda 3 2013 has 11 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 3 2009. This could mean that the Mazda 3 2013 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 2013 is 0.2 metres more than that of the Mazda 3 2009. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`815 | 1`770 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda 3 2013 scores higher in safety tests. The Mazda 3 2013 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | Mazda 3 2013 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 3 2009 has serious deffects in 150 percent more cases than Mazda 3 2013, so Mazda 3 2013 quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 11 600 | 3200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |