Mazda 323 1998 vs Mazda MX-5 2006
| Body: | Hatchback | Cabrio | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 88 HP | 126 HP | |
| Torque: | 132 NM | 167 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.2 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
|
Mazda MX-5 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 323 engine produces 38 HP less power than Mazda MX-5, whereas torque is 35 NM less than Mazda MX-5. Due to the lower power, Mazda 323 reaches 100 km/h speed 4.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.4 | 7.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda MX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 323 consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda MX-5, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 323 could require 165 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 323 consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda MX-5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 820 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| 630 km with real consumption | 600 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Mazda 323) 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 (Mazda MX-5) 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 | 380'000 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 | Used only for this car | |
| 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 323 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 MX-5 2006 1.8 engine: The engine often has unstable idling speeds and problems with the thermostat. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.04 m | 4.00 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.26 m | |
| Mazda 323 is 4 cm longer than the Mazda MX-5, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 323 is 14 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 304 litres | 150 litres | |
|
Mazda 323 has more luggage capacity. Mazda 323 has 154 litres more trunk space than the Mazda MX-5. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 323 is 0.2 metres less than that of the Mazda MX-5. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`355 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Mazda MX-5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 323 has serious deffects in 565 percent more cases than Mazda MX-5, so Mazda MX-5 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 5400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 323 has
|
Mazda MX-5 has
| |