Skoda Rapid 2012 vs Mazda 3 2016

 
Skoda Rapid
2012 - 2017
Mazda 3
2016 - 2019
Gearbox: ManualAutomatic
Engine: 1.6 Diesel1.5 Diesel

Performance

Power: 105 HP105 HP
Torque: 250 NM270 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 10.6 seconds11.6 seconds
Skoda Rapid and Mazda 3 have the same engine power, but Skoda Rapid torque is 20 NM less than Mazda 3. Skoda Rapid reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds faster.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 4.34.4
Real fuel consumption: 5.2 l/100km6.6 l/100km
The Skoda Rapid is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
By specification Skoda Rapid consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that by driving the Skoda Rapid over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel.
By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Skoda Rapid consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3.
Fuel tank capacity: 55 litres51 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 1270 km in combined cycle1150 km in combined cycle
1480 km on highway1240 km on highway
1050 km with real consumption770 km with real consumption
Skoda Rapid gets more mileage on one fuel tank.
Ground clearance: 136 mm (5.4 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.

Dimensions

Length: 4.48 m4.47 m
Width: 1.71 m1.80 m
Height: 1.46 m1.45 m
Skoda Rapid is 1 cm longer than the Mazda 3, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Skoda Rapid is 1 cm higher.
Trunk capacity: 550 litres364 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
1490 litres1263 litres
Skoda Rapid has more luggage capacity.
Skoda Rapid has 186 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Skoda Rapid (by 227 litres).
Turning diameter: 10.6 meters10.6 meters
Gross weight (kg): 1`7251`900
Safety: no data
Quality:
average

average
Skoda Rapid has slightly fewer faults.
Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mazda 3, so Skoda Rapid quality could be a bit better.
Average price (€): 700010 400
Pros and Cons: Skoda Rapid has
  • more dynamic
  • lower fuel consumption
  • more full fuel tank mileage
  • roomier boot
  • lower price
Mazda 3 has
  • higher ground clearance
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv