Honda Accord 2008 vs Mazda 6 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 156 HP | 155 HP | |
| Torque: | 192 NM | 193 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.2 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
Mazda 6 is a more dynamic driving. Honda Accord engine produces 1 HP more power than Mazda 6, but torque is 1 NM less than Mazda 6. Despite the higher power, Honda Accord reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 7.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 8.2 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda Accord consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Honda Accord could require 105 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda Accord consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 910 km in combined cycle | |
| 1080 km on highway | 1180 km on highway | ||
| 770 km with real consumption | 780 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda CR-V, Honda FR-V, Honda Stream | 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. Mazda 6 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Honda Accord 2008 2.0 engine: In 2001, Honda introduced the K-series engine lineup, featuring an aluminum block with an open-deck design and cast-iron cylinder liners. It utilizes a port fuel injection system, a 16-valve aluminum cylinder head without hydraulic lifters, individual ignition coils, a VTC cam ... More about Honda Accord 2008 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: | 4.75 m | 4.79 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.49 m | |
| Honda Accord is 4 cm shorter than the Mazda 6, 5 cm wider, while the height of Honda Accord is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 395 litres | 519 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1252 litres | 1751 litres | |
|
Mazda 6 has more luggage space. Honda Accord has 124 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 6. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 6 (by 499 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`100 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Mazda 6 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Honda Accord has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Mazda 6, so Mazda 6 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4200 | 4200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Mazda 6 has
| |