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: | 3.0 Diesel | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Toyota Land Cruiser) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Mazda 6) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
| 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: | 190 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 420 NM | 226 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 8.4 seconds | |
| Toyota Land Cruiser engine produces 20 HP more power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 194 NM more than Mazda 6. Despite the higher power, Toyota Land Cruiser reaches 100 km/h speed 2.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.1 | 8.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.1 l/100km | 8.5 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Toyota Land Cruiser consumes 0.1 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 15 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Toyota Land Cruiser consumes 3.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 87 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1070 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 1220 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| 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: | 420'000 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 Mazda 6 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 25 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Toyota Hilux | 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 2013 3.0 engine: The engine tends to be noisy and vibrate.
Nozzle life is limited when using poor quality fuel.
Increased oil consumption tends to occur over time. | |||
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 |
1934 litres | 1702 litres | |
|
Toyota Land Cruiser has more luggage capacity. Toyota Land Cruiser has 111 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 6. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Toyota Land Cruiser (by 232 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`990 | 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
| |