Toyota Land Cruiser 2013 vs Mazda 6 2010
| Body: | Crossover / SUV | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.7 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 246 NM | 226 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 8.4 seconds | |
|
Mazda 6 is a more dynamic driving. Toyota Land Cruiser engine produces 7 HP less power than Mazda 6, but torque is 20 NM more than Mazda 6. Due to the lower power, Toyota Land Cruiser reaches 100 km/h speed 2.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 12.5 | 8.0 | |
|
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Toyota Land Cruiser consumes 4.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Toyota Land Cruiser could require 675 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 87 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 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. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Ground clearance: | 220 mm (8.7 inches) | 165 mm (6.5 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Toyota Land Cruiser 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 480'000 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 Toyota Land Cruiser engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 21 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Toyota Hilux, Toyota Tacoma | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda Tribute | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota Land Cruiser might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Toyota Land Cruiser 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. | |||
| Toyota Land Cruiser 2013 2.7 engine: A robust and reliable engine.
Automatic transmission versions may experience increased vibration at idle. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.78 m | 4.76 m | |
| Width: | 1.89 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.85 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Toyota Land Cruiser is larger. Toyota Land Cruiser is 3 cm longer than the Mazda 6, 9 cm wider, while the height of Toyota Land Cruiser is 41 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 621 litres | 510 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1702 litres | |
|
Toyota Land Cruiser has more luggage capacity. Toyota Land Cruiser has 111 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota Land Cruiser is 0.2 metres less than that of the Mazda 6. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`850 | 1`970 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 27 000 | 3800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Land Cruiser has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |