Seat Exeo 2009 vs Mazda 6 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 143 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 330 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
Seat Exeo is more dynamic to drive. Seat Exeo engine produces 3 HP more power than Mazda 6, but torque is 10 NM less than Mazda 6. Thanks to more power Seat Exeo reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.7 | 6.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.2 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Seat Exeo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Seat Exeo consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that by driving the Seat Exeo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Seat Exeo consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1220 km in combined cycle | 1060 km in combined cycle | |
| 1550 km on highway | 1250 km on highway | ||
| 1120 km with real consumption | 960 km with real consumption | ||
| Seat Exeo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 390'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Seat Exeo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Audi A4 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda 5 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 6 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Seat Exeo 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. | |||
| Seat Exeo 2009 2.0 engine: This diesel engine is essentially a more efficient version of the well-known CAGA engine. The life of its piezo injectors depends heavily on the quality of the fuel used.
The timing belt is replaced at ... More about Seat Exeo 2009 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.67 m | 4.71 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.44 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Seat Exeo is 4 cm shorter than the Mazda 6, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Seat Exeo is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 442 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1751 litres | |
|
Mazda 6 has more luggage space. Seat Exeo has 63 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Seat Exeo is 0.2 metres less than that of the Mazda 6. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`050 | 2`110 | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Mazda 6 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Mazda 6 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Seat Exeo has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Mazda 6, so Mazda 6 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4400 | 2800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Seat Exeo has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |