Mazda 6 2002 vs Alfa Romeo 156 2002

 
Mazda 6
2002 - 2005
Alfa Romeo 156
2002 - 2003
Gearbox: ManualManual
Engine: 2.0 Petrol2.0 Petrol
Camshaft drive: Timing chainTiming 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: 141 HP165 HP
Torque: 181 NM206 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 9.9 seconds8.2 seconds
Alfa Romeo 156 is a more dynamic driving.
Mazda 6 engine produces 24 HP less power than Alfa Romeo 156, whereas torque is 25 NM less than Alfa Romeo 156. Due to the lower power, Mazda 6 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds later.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 8.58.9
Real fuel consumption: 8.4 l/100km9.7 l/100km
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
By specification Mazda 6 consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Alfa Romeo 156, which means that by driving the Mazda 6 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel.
By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 6 consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Alfa Romeo 156.
Fuel tank capacity: 64 litres63 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 750 km in combined cycle700 km in combined cycle
960 km on highway920 km on highway
760 km with real consumption640 km with real consumption
Mazda 6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank.

Engines

Average engine lifespan: 420'000 km250'000 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: 13 years8 years
Engine spread: Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda MX-5, Mazda 5, Mazda CX-5Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Alfa Romeo GT, Alfa Romeo Spider, Alfa Romeo GTV
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: noyes
The Alfa Romeo 156 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.

Dimensions

Length: 4.69 m4.43 m
Width: 1.78 m1.74 m
Height: 1.45 m1.42 m
Mazda 6 is larger.
Mazda 6 is 26 cm longer than the Alfa Romeo 156, 4 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 6 is 3 cm higher.
Trunk capacity: 505 litres360 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
1712 litres1180 litres
Mazda 6 has more luggage capacity.
Mazda 6 has 145 litres more trunk space than the Alfa Romeo 156. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 6 (by 532 litres).
Turning diameter: 10.8 meters11.1 meters
The turning circle of the Mazda 6 is 0.3 metres less than that of the Alfa Romeo 156.
Gross weight (kg): 1`9051`815
Safety: no data
Quality:
average

low
Mazda 6 has fewer problems.
According to annual technical inspection data Alfa Romeo 156 has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Mazda 6, so Mazda 6 quality is probably significantly better
Average price (€): 10001200
Pros and Cons: Mazda 6 has
  • timing chain engine
  • lower fuel consumption
  • more full fuel tank mileage
  • longer expected engine lifespan
  • roomier boot
  • fewer faults
  • lower price
Alfa Romeo 156 has
  • timing belt engine
  • more power
  • more dynamic
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv