Mazda 6 2002 vs Honda Accord 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 310 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.7 seconds | 10.3 seconds | |
|
Honda Accord is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 6 engine produces 4 HP less power than Honda Accord, whereas torque is 30 NM less than Honda Accord. Due to the lower power, Mazda 6 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Honda Accord is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 6 consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda Accord, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 6 could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 6 consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda Accord. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 1120 km in combined cycle | |
| 1180 km on highway | 1350 km on highway | ||
| 920 km with real consumption | 980 km with real consumption | ||
| Honda Accord gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 370'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 3 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda MPV | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Honda CR-V, Honda Civic, Honda FR-V | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Honda Accord might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.69 m | 4.75 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.47 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 6 is 6 cm shorter than the Honda Accord, 2 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 6 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 505 litres | 576 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1712 litres | 1657 litres | |
| Mazda 6 has 71 litres less trunk space than the Honda Accord. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 6 (by 55 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 6 is 0.8 metres less than that of the Honda Accord, which means Mazda 6 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`010 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Honda Accord has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mazda 6, so Honda Accord quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.3/10 | 8.0/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 6 has
|
Honda Accord has
| |