Ford Focus 2008 vs Mazda 3 2007
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 HP | 143 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 360 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
| Ford Focus engine produces 7 HP less power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 40 NM less than Mazda 3. Despite less power, Ford Focus reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 6.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.3 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Focus is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Focus consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that by driving the Ford Focus over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Focus consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 53 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 910 km in combined cycle | 910 km in combined cycle | |
| 1120 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 840 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 390'000 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 Ford Focus engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Ford Mondeo, Ford Galaxy, Ford S-Max, Ford C-Max | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda 5 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Ford Focus might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Ford Focus 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.50 m | 1.47 m | |
| Ford Focus is 1 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 9 cm wider, while the height of Ford Focus is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 537 litres | 413 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1285 litres | |
|
Ford Focus has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Ford Focus has 124 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. The Mazda 3 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Focus is 0.3 metres less than that of the Mazda 3. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`950 | 1`925 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | high | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Focus has serious deffects in 55 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 2400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.8/10 | 8.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Focus has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |