Mercedes C class 2000 vs Mazda 3 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.3 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Mercedes C class is more dynamic to drive. Mercedes C class engine produces 58 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 85 NM more than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power Mercedes C class reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.7 | 7.2 | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mercedes C class consumes 2.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mercedes C class could require 375 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 630 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| Mazda 3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Mazda 3) 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 (Mercedes C class) 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. | |||
| Mazda 3 2003 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 2003 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.53 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.73 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.46 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mercedes C class is 4 cm longer than the Mazda 3, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mercedes C class is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 413 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 675 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mercedes C class is 0.5 metres more than that of the Mazda 3, which means Mercedes C class can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`500 | 1`675 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mercedes C class has serious deffects in 85 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.9/10 | 8.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes C klase has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |