Mercedes C class 2013 vs Mazda 3 2019
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.1 Diesel | 1.8 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.8 seconds | 12.1 seconds | |
|
Mercedes C class is more dynamic to drive. Mercedes C class engine produces 54 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 130 NM more than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power Mercedes C class reaches 100 km/h speed 4.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.5 | 4.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.3 l/100km | 5.9 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Mercedes C class consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that by driving the Mercedes C class over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mercedes C class consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 41 litres | 51 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 910 km in combined cycle | 1100 km in combined cycle | |
| 1050 km on highway | 1210 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 860 km with real consumption | ||
| 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 360'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 13 other car models, including Mercedes E klase, Mercedes ML, Mercedes A klase | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mercedes C class might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
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): | 2`135 | 1`914 | |
| 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 (€): | 27 600 | 14 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes C klase has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |