Mazda MX-5 2008 vs Audi TT 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 161 HP | 211 HP | |
| Torque: | 188 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 seconds | 6.1 seconds | |
|
Audi TT is a more dynamic driving. Mazda MX-5 engine produces 50 HP less power than Audi TT, whereas torque is 162 NM less than Audi TT. Due to the lower power, Mazda MX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.0 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.1 l/100km | 9.0 l/100km | |
|
The Audi TT is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda MX-5 consumes 0.8 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 120 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda MX-5 consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi TT. | |||
| 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) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Audi TT) 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.02 m | 4.19 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | no data | 1.36 m | |
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 250 litres | |
| 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): | no data | 1`635 | |
| 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
| |