Volkswagen Passat 2012 vs Mazda 3 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| 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: | 170 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 seconds | 8.1 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen Passat engine produces 20 HP more power than Mazda 3, but torque is 30 NM less than Mazda 3. Despite the higher power, Volkswagen Passat reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 4.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 5.9 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Passat consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Passat could require 270 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Passat consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 51 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1180 km in combined cycle | 1240 km in combined cycle | |
| 1320 km on highway | 1410 km on highway | ||
| 980 km with real consumption | 860 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 350'000 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 Volkswagen Passat engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Sharan, Audi A3, Skoda Superb | Used also on Mazda 6, 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.77 m | 4.47 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Volkswagen Passat is larger. Volkswagen Passat is 31 cm longer than the Mazda 3, 2 cm wider, while the height of Volkswagen Passat is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 588 litres | 364 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1263 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Passat has more luggage capacity. Volkswagen Passat has 224 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Passat is 0.8 metres more than that of the Mazda 3, which means Volkswagen Passat can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`300 | 1`910 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda 3 scores higher in safety tests. The Mazda 3 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Passat has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 16 200 | 7800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Passat has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |