Mazda 323 1998 vs Mazda 3 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 88 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 132 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.5 seconds | 12.7 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 323 engine produces 17 HP less power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 13 NM less than Mazda 3. Due to the lower power, Mazda 323 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.2 | 7.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 8.7 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mazda 323 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 323 could require 60 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda 323 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 800 km on highway | 850 km on highway | ||
| 630 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
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: | 10 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda Demio | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda Xedos 6, Mazda MX-3 | |
| 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 2006 1.6 engine: This engine is widely regarded as reliable, though it can develop certain issues over time. One of the most common problems is increased oil consumption, often starting after 120,000 km. This is frequently ... More about Mazda 3 2006 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.20 m | 4.42 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Mazda 323 is smaller. Mazda 323 is 22 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 323 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 355 litres | 300 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1000 litres | 635 litres | |
|
Mazda 323 has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Mazda 323 has 55 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. The Mazda 3 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 323 (by 365 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 323 is 0.5 metres less than that of the Mazda 3, which means Mazda 323 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`750 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 323 has serious deffects in 845 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 2000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.0/10 | 8.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 323 has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |