Mazda 6 2018 vs Skoda Octavia 2019
| Body: | Sedan | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 145 HP | 190 HP | |
| Torque: | 213 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 6.9 seconds | |
|
Skoda Octavia is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 6 engine produces 45 HP less power than Skoda Octavia, whereas torque is 107 NM less than Skoda Octavia. Due to the lower power, Mazda 6 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.2 | 7.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 6 consumes 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Octavia, which means that by driving the Mazda 6 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 165 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 6 consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Octavia. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 610 km in combined cycle | |
| 830 km with real consumption | 590 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. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 165 mm (6.5 inches) | 143 mm (5.6 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 6 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Mazda 6 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.87 m | 4.69 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.83 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.47 m | |
|
Mazda 6 is larger, but slightly lower. Mazda 6 is 18 cm longer than the Skoda Octavia, 1 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 6 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 489 litres | 600 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1555 litres | |
|
Skoda Octavia has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, This could mean that the Mazda 6 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 6 is 1.6 metres more than that of the Skoda Octavia, which means Mazda 6 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`005 kg | 2`031 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`391 kg | 1`469 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 614 kg | 562 kg | |
| Mazda 6 load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 8 procentiem more than Skoda Octavia. Therefore, Mazda 6 is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | |||
| The Skoda Octavia scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | low | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 22 000 | 15 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 6 has
|
Skoda Octavia has
| |