Skoda Octavia 2009 vs Mazda 6 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 102 HP | 147 HP | |
| Torque: | 148 NM | 184 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.3 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Mazda 6 is a more dynamic driving. Skoda Octavia engine produces 45 HP less power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 36 NM less than Mazda 6. Due to the lower power, Skoda Octavia reaches 100 km/h speed 2.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 | 7.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Octavia is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Skoda Octavia consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Skoda Octavia could require 45 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Skoda Octavia consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 940 km on highway | 1160 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 790 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Seat Altea, Seat Leon | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda MX-5, Mazda 5, Mazda CX-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 Skoda Octavia 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 6 2008 2.0 engine: The engine tends to idle unevenly. Engine problems may also include the thermostat and cooling pump. This engine tends to consume more oil at higher mileages. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.57 m | 4.76 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Skoda Octavia is smaller. Skoda Octavia is 19 cm shorter than the Mazda 6, 3 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 560 litres | 510 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1350 litres | 1702 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Skoda Octavia has 50 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 6. The Mazda 6 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 6 (by 352 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Octavia is 1.2 metres less than that of the Mazda 6, which means Skoda Octavia can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`895 | 1`950 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Mazda 6 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Skoda Octavia, so Mazda 6 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 4200 | 2800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Octavia has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |