Mitsubishi Lancer 2008 vs Mazda 3 2006
| 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: | 143 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 178 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Lancer is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Lancer engine produces 38 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 33 NM more than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Lancer reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 7.9 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Lancer consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Lancer could require 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Lancer consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mitsubishi ASX | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda Xedos 6, Mazda MX-3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mazda 3 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| Mazda 3 2006 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 2006 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.57 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.49 m | 1.47 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mitsubishi Lancer is 8 cm longer than the Mazda 3, width is practically the same , while the height of Mitsubishi Lancer is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 400 litres | 413 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1285 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Mitsubishi Lancer has 13 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 3. This could mean that the Mitsubishi Lancer uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Lancer is 0.9 metres less than that of the Mazda 3, which means Mitsubishi Lancer can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`850 | 1`710 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 2200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.8/10 | 8.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Lancer has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |