Mazda MX-5 2009 vs Audi TT 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Mazda MX-5) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Audi TT) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
| 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: | 160 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 188 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.6 seconds | 7.7 seconds | |
| Mazda MX-5 engine produces 10 HP less power than Audi TT, whereas torque is 162 NM less than Audi TT. Despite less power, Mazda MX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 5.8 l/100km | |
|
The Audi TT is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda MX-5 consumes 2.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi TT, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda MX-5 could require 315 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda MX-5 consumes 2.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi TT. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 1090 km in combined cycle | |
| 840 km on highway | 1330 km on highway | ||
| 590 km with real consumption | 1030 km with real consumption | ||
| Audi TT gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
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: | 13 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 3, Mazda 5, Mazda CX-5 | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Sharan, Audi A3, Skoda Superb | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Audi TT 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 2009 2.0 engine: The engine tends to idle unevenly. Engine problems may also include the thermostat and cooling pump. This engine tends to consume more oil at higher mileages. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.02 m | 4.19 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.26 m | 1.36 m | |
|
Mazda MX-5 is smaller. Mazda MX-5 is 17 cm shorter than the Audi TT, 12 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda MX-5 is 10 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 150 litres | 250 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 700 litres | |
|
Audi TT has more luggage space. Mazda MX-5 has 100 litres less trunk space than the Audi TT. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda MX-5 is 0.9 metres less than that of the Audi TT, which means Mazda MX-5 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`375 | 1`735 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Audi TT has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda MX-5 has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Audi TT, so Audi TT quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | no data | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda MX-5 has
|
Audi TT has
| |