Mazda 6 2010 vs Ford Focus 2011
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 155 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 193 NM | 150 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.1 seconds | 12.3 seconds | |
|
Mazda 6 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 6 engine produces 50 HP more power than Ford Focus, whereas torque is 43 NM more than Ford Focus. Thanks to more power Mazda 6 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.0 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Focus is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 6 consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Focus, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 6 could require 255 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 6 consumes 1.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Focus. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 930 km in combined cycle | |
| 1100 km on highway | 1140 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford Focus 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 | 460'000 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: | 13 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda MX-5, Mazda 5, Mazda CX-5 | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Ford C-Max, Ford Fiesta, Ford B-Max | |
| 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. | |||
| 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: | 4.76 m | 4.36 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.46 m | |
| Mazda 6 is 40 cm longer than the Ford Focus, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 6 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 510 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1702 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 6 is 0.8 metres more than that of the Ford Focus, which means Mazda 6 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`980 | 1`825 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Mazda 6 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Focus has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Mazda 6, so Mazda 6 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3400 | 3800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 6 has
|
Ford Focus has
| |