Mazda MX-5 2006 vs Opel Astra 2010
| Body: | Cabrio | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.8 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: | 126 HP | 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 167 NM | 155 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 11.7 seconds | |
|
Mazda MX-5 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda MX-5 engine produces 10 HP more power than Opel Astra, whereas torque is 12 NM more than Opel Astra. Thanks to more power Mazda MX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.3 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The Opel Astra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda MX-5 consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Opel Astra, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda MX-5 could require 150 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda MX-5 consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Opel Astra. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 860 km on highway | 1090 km on highway | ||
| 600 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| Opel Astra gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Opel Astra) 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: | 380'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 16 years | 17 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Opel Mokka | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Opel Astra might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Mazda MX-5 2006 1.8 engine: The engine often has unstable idling speeds and problems with the thermostat. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.00 m | 4.42 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.26 m | 1.51 m | |
|
Mazda MX-5 is smaller. Mazda MX-5 is 42 cm shorter than the Opel Astra, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda MX-5 is 25 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 150 litres | 370 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1235 litres | |
|
Opel Astra has more luggage space. Mazda MX-5 has 220 litres less trunk space than the Opel Astra. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda MX-5 is 1.4 metres less than that of the Opel Astra, which means Mazda MX-5 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`355 | 1`870 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | Opel Astra has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda MX-5 has serious deffects in 145 percent more cases than Opel Astra, so Opel Astra quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 5400 | 3600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda MX-5 has
|
Opel Astra has
| |