Mazda 6 2002 vs Alfa Romeo 156 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 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: | 141 HP | 165 HP | |
| Torque: | 181 NM | 206 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 8.2 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): | 8.5 | 8.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 9.7 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 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 920 km on highway | ||
| 760 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 250'000 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 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 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: | no | yes | |
| 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. | |||
| Mazda 6 2002 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: | 4.69 m | 4.43 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.42 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 litres | 360 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1712 litres | 1180 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 meters | 11.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 6 is 0.3 metres less than that of the Alfa Romeo 156. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`905 | 1`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 (€): | 1000 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 6 has
|
Alfa Romeo 156 has
| |