Mercedes C class 2013 vs Mazda 3 2019
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 156 HP | 122 HP | |
| Torque: | 250 NM | 213 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 seconds | 10.8 seconds | |
|
Mercedes C class is more dynamic to drive. Mercedes C class engine produces 34 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 37 NM more than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power Mercedes C class reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 6.7 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mercedes C class consumes 0.3 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 45 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mercedes C class consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 41 litres | 51 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 920 km in combined cycle | |
| 810 km on highway | 1100 km on highway | ||
| 510 km with real consumption | 760 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 3 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) | 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.69 m | 4.66 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.44 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mercedes C class is 3 cm longer than the Mazda 3, 1 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 480 litres | 450 litres | |
|
Mercedes C class has more luggage capacity. Mercedes C class has 30 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.22 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`990 | 1`902 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda 3 scores higher in safety tests. | |||
| Quality: | high | low | |
| Mercedes C class has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 3 has serious deffects in 140 percent more cases than Mercedes C class, so Mercedes C class quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 26 800 | 14 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes C klase has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |