Mazda 3 2013 vs Nissan Qashqai 2013
| Body: | Sedan | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 165 HP | 141 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 196 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 seconds | 10.1 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 3 engine produces 24 HP more power than Nissan Qashqai, whereas torque is 14 NM more than Nissan Qashqai. Thanks to more power Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds faster. | |||
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 Nissan Qashqai, 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 | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 940 km in combined cycle | |
| 1060 km on highway | 1180 km on highway | ||
| Nissan Qashqai gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 15 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 Nissan X-Trail, Nissan Serena | |
| 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 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: | 4.59 m | 4.38 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.59 m | |
| Mazda 3 is 21 cm longer than the Nissan Qashqai, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 3 is 14 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 419 litres | 430 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Mazda 3 has 11 litres less trunk space than the Nissan Qashqai. 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: | 10.6 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.1 metres less than that of the Nissan Qashqai. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`815 | 1`890 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Qashqai has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 600 | 10 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Nissan Qashqai has
| |