Mazda 3 2013 vs Mercedes C class 2011
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 165 HP | 204 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 310 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 seconds | 7.2 seconds | |
|
Mercedes C class is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 39 HP less power than Mercedes C class, whereas torque is 100 NM less than Mercedes C class. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.2 | 6.9 | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 3 consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes C class, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 105 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 59 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 1060 km on highway | 1150 km on highway | ||
| 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) | |
| 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: | 14 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 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. | |||
| 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 | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.59 m | 4.59 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.45 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 3 and Mercedes C class are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 419 litres | 475 litres | |
|
Mercedes C class has more luggage space. Mazda 3 has 56 litres less trunk space than the Mercedes C class. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.2 metres less than that of the Mercedes C class. | |||
| Power steering: | Electric power steering | Hydraulic power steering | |
| Electric power steering is simpler, quieter, more fuel-efficient, more configurable and provides additional features such as auto-steering for lane assist and parking. The disadvantages of electric power steering are possible overheating under prolonged load conditions and insufficient feedback (feeling) during steering. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`815 kg | 2`020 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`220 kg | 1`505 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 595 kg | 515 kg | |
| Mazda 3 load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 13 procentiem more than Mercedes C class. Therefore, Mazda 3 is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda 3 is better rated in child safety tests. The Mercedes C class scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Mercedes C class has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 3 has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Mercedes C class, so Mercedes C class quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | no data | 11 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Mercedes C klase has
| |