Volkswagen Passat 2005 vs Mazda 6 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 147 HP | |
| Torque: | 200 NM | 184 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 10.3 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Passat is more dynamic to drive. Volkswagen Passat engine produces 3 HP more power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 16 NM more than Mazda 6. Thanks to more power Volkswagen Passat reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.4 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.8 l/100km | 8.2 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Passat consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Passat could require 180 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Passat consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km with real consumption | 780 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 420'000 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: | 5 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Audi A3, 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Volkswagen Passat 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. | |||
| Volkswagen Passat 2005 2.0 engine: 2.0 FSI engine, part of the EA827 family, features a lightweight aluminum block with cast-iron liners and a unique timing system. A toothed belt drives the exhaust camshaft, while the intake camshaft is driven by a single-row chain, which also integrates with the variable valve timing mechanism. The timing regulator is ... More about Volkswagen Passat 2005 2.0 engine 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: | 4.77 m | 4.71 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Volkswagen Passat is larger. Volkswagen Passat is 6 cm longer than the Mazda 6, 2 cm wider, while the height of Volkswagen Passat is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 603 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1751 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Passat has more luggage capacity. Volkswagen Passat has 98 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`500 | 1`970 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Mazda 6 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Passat has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Mazda 6, so Mazda 6 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 2800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Passat has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |