Mazda 6 2010 vs Ford Focus 2011
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.6 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: | 120 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 165 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.4 seconds | 8.7 seconds | |
|
Ford Focus is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 6 engine produces 30 HP less power than Ford Focus, whereas torque is 75 NM less than Ford Focus. Due to the lower power, Mazda 6 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 6.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Focus is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 6 consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Focus, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 6 could require 30 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 6 consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Focus. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 1300 km on highway | 1100 km on highway | ||
| 800 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
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 | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Ford C-Max, Ford Tourneo | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Ford Focus might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Mazda 6 2010 1.8 engine: The engine often has an unstable idle speed. The thermostat, cooling pump, and alternator are weak points. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.76 m | 4.53 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.48 m | |
| Mazda 6 is 22 cm longer than the Ford Focus, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 6 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 519 litres | 475 litres | |
|
Mazda 6 has more luggage capacity. Mazda 6 has 44 litres more trunk space than the Ford Focus. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 6 is 0.8 metres more than that of the Ford Focus, which means Mazda 6 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`885 | 1`900 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Mazda 6 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Focus has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Mazda 6, so Mazda 6 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4800 | 4000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 6 has
|
Ford Focus has
| |