Mazda 6 2010 vs Volkswagen Passat 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Diesel | |
| 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: | 147 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 184 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Passat is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 6 engine produces 7 HP more power than Volkswagen Passat, but torque is 136 NM less than Volkswagen Passat. Despite the higher power, Mazda 6 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.0 | 5.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Passat is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 6 consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Passat, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 6 could require 270 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 6 consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Passat. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 910 km in combined cycle | 1340 km in combined cycle | |
| 1180 km on highway | 1550 km on highway | ||
| 860 km with real consumption | 1060 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Passat gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 390'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| 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 12 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Sharan, Audi A3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Passat 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 2010 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. Volkswagen Passat 2010 2.0 engine: The engine is very durable and can last a long time with proper maintenance, and is also quite economical for its power. There may be some problems with the turbine geometry. It is important to use good ... More about Volkswagen Passat 2010 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.76 m | 4.77 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.47 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 6 is 1 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Passat, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 6 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 519 litres | 565 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Passat has more luggage space. Mazda 6 has 46 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Passat. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 6 is 0.4 metres more than that of the Volkswagen Passat, which means Mazda 6 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`915 | 2`130 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | low | |
| Mazda 6 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Passat has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Mazda 6, so Mazda 6 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4800 | 4800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 6 has
|
Volkswagen Passat has
| |