Kia Optima 2013 vs Mazda 6 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.7 Diesel | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Kia Optima) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Mazda 6) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 HP | 192 HP | |
| Torque: | 325 NM | 256 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.6 seconds | 7.8 seconds | |
|
Mazda 6 is a more dynamic driving. Kia Optima engine produces 56 HP less power than Mazda 6, but torque is 69 NM more than Mazda 6. Due to the lower power, Kia Optima reaches 100 km/h speed 3.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Kia Optima is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Kia Optima consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that by driving the Kia Optima over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Kia Optima consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1160 km in combined cycle | 980 km in combined cycle | |
| 1420 km on highway | 1240 km on highway | ||
| 1060 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
| Kia Optima gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Kia Sportage, Hyundai Tucson, Hyundai i40, Hyundai ix35 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 3, 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: | 4.85 m | 4.87 m | |
| Width: | 1.83 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.45 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Kia Optima is 3 cm shorter than the Mazda 6, 1 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 505 litres | 489 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Kia Optima has 16 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 6. The Mazda 6 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Kia Optima is 1 metres more than that of the Mazda 6, which means Kia Optima can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`050 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Kia Optima is better rated in child safety tests. The Mazda 6 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 9200 | 7200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Kia Optima has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |