Volkswagen Passat 2010 vs Mazda 6 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 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: | 140 HP | 147 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 184 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 10 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Passat is more dynamic to drive. Volkswagen Passat engine produces 7 HP less power than Mazda 6, but torque is 136 NM more than Mazda 6. Despite less power, Volkswagen Passat reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.2 | 7.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Passat is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Passat consumes 1.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that by driving the Volkswagen Passat over 15,000 km in a year you can save 270 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Passat consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1340 km in combined cycle | 910 km in combined cycle | |
| 1550 km on highway | 1180 km on highway | ||
| 1060 km with real consumption | 860 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Passat gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 390'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 12 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Sharan, Audi A3 | 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 2010 2.0 engine: The engine is very durable and can last a long time with proper maintenance, and is also quite economical for its power. There may be some problems with the turbine geometry. It is important to use good ... More about Volkswagen Passat 2010 2.0 engine Mazda 6 2010 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 | 4.76 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.44 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Volkswagen Passat is 1 cm longer than the Mazda 6, 3 cm wider, while the height of Volkswagen Passat is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 565 litres | 519 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Passat has more luggage capacity. Volkswagen Passat has 46 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Passat is 0.4 metres less than that of the Mazda 6, which means Volkswagen Passat can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`130 | 1`915 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | average | |
| Mazda 6 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Passat has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Mazda 6, so Mazda 6 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4800 | 4800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Passat has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |