Mazda 6 2008 vs Skoda Octavia 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Mazda 6) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Skoda Octavia) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 147 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 184 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 seconds | 11.8 seconds | |
|
Mazda 6 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 6 engine produces 42 HP more power than Skoda Octavia, but torque is 66 NM less than Skoda Octavia. Thanks to more power Mazda 6 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 5.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 5.8 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Octavia is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 6 consumes 2.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Octavia, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 6 could require 315 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 6 consumes 2.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Octavia. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 900 km in combined cycle | 1100 km in combined cycle | |
| 1160 km on highway | 1300 km on highway | ||
| 790 km with real consumption | 940 km with real consumption | ||
| Skoda Octavia gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 165 mm (6.5 inches) | 140 mm (5.5 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. | |||
| Mazda 6 2008 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 | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Mazda 6 is larger, but slightly lower. Mazda 6 is 19 cm longer than the Skoda Octavia, 3 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 6 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 510 litres | 560 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1702 litres | no data | |
|
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: | 11.4 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 6 is 1.2 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: | 1`950 kg | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Mazda 6 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Skoda Octavia, so Mazda 6 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 6 has
|
Skoda Octavia has
| |