Mazda 3 2013 vs Volvo S60 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 165 HP | 249 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 360 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 seconds | 7.2 seconds | |
|
Volvo S60 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 3 engine produces 84 HP less power than Volvo S60, whereas torque is 150 NM less than Volvo S60. Due to the lower power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.2 | 8.9 | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 3 consumes 2.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S60, which means that by driving the Mazda 3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 405 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 68 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| Mazda 3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| 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 | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.87 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Mazda 3 is smaller. Mazda 3 is 4 cm shorter than the Volvo S60, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 419 litres | 380 litres | |
|
Mazda 3 has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Mazda 3 has 39 litres more trunk space than the Volvo S60. The Volvo S60 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.7 metres less than that of the Volvo S60, which means Mazda 3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`815 | 2`070 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo S60 has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 600 | 6000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Volvo S60 has
| |