Skoda Octavia 2017 vs Mazda 3 2016
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 180 HP | 165 HP | |
| Torque: | 250 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.4 seconds | 8.2 seconds | |
|
Skoda Octavia is more dynamic to drive. Skoda Octavia engine produces 15 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 40 NM more than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power Skoda Octavia reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.1 | 5.8 | |
| Skoda Octavia 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 Skoda Octavia could require 45 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 51 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 870 km in combined cycle | |
| 940 km on highway | 1060 km on highway | ||
| Mazda 3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 140 mm (5.5 inches) | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 3 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Mazda 3 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
| Mazda 3 2016 2.0 engine: This engine is not well-suited for low-quality fuel, as it quickly clogs the fuel system. The use of substandard fuel often leads to the failure of expensive ignition coils, resulting in significant repair ... More about Mazda 3 2016 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.67 m | 4.47 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Skoda Octavia is larger. Skoda Octavia is 20 cm longer than the Mazda 3, 1 cm wider, while the height of Skoda Octavia is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 590 litres | 364 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1580 litres | 1334 litres | |
|
Skoda Octavia has more luggage capacity. Skoda Octavia has 226 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Skoda Octavia (by 246 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Octavia is 0.1 metres less than that of the Mazda 3. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`860 | 1`815 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Skoda Octavia has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 000 | 10 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Octavia has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |