Mazda 6 2002 vs BMW 3 series 2002
| Body: | Hatchback | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 120 HP | 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 165 NM | 175 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 11 seconds | |
| Mazda 6 engine produces 4 HP more power than BMW 3 series, but torque is 10 NM less than BMW 3 series. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.3 | 7.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.2 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 6 consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 6 could require 180 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 6 consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 1140 km on highway | ||
| 780 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
| 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) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 390'000 km | 350'000 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 Mazda 6 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 6 years | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The BMW 3 series engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| Mazda 6 2002 1.8 engine: The engine often has an unstable idle speed. The thermostat, cooling pump, and alternator are weak points. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.67 m | 4.47 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Mazda 6 is larger. Mazda 6 is 20 cm longer than the BMW 3 series, 4 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 6 is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 492 litres | 440 litres | |
|
Mazda 6 has more luggage capacity. Mazda 6 has 52 litres more trunk space than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 6 is 0.8 metres more than that of the BMW 3 series, which means Mazda 6 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`830 kg | 1`810 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`295 kg | 1`320 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 535 kg | 490 kg | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | low | |
| Mazda 6 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Mazda 6, so Mazda 6 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 2600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.3/10 | 7.9/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 6 has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |