Mazda 3 2013 vs Ford Focus 2014
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 165 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 159 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 seconds | 11.8 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 3 engine produces 40 HP more power than Ford Focus, whereas torque is 51 NM more than Ford Focus. Thanks to more power Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.2 | 6.3 | |
| Mazda 3 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Focus, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 870 km in combined cycle | |
| Ford Focus gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda MX-5, Mazda CX-5, Mazda CX-3 | Used also on Ford C-Max | |
| 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: | 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. | |||
| 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 Ford Focus 2014 1.6 engine: The engine boasts a simple and reliable design. After 100,000 km, piston knocking is a common issue. Electromagnetic Ti-VCT valves often develop leaks, and high-voltage wires frequently disconnect. The engine ... More about Ford Focus 2014 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.59 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.48 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 3 is 5 cm longer than the Ford Focus, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 419 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.4 metres less than that of the Ford Focus, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`815 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Mazda 3 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Focus has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 600 | 8200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Ford Focus has
| |