Mazda 6 2010 vs BMW 3 series 2010
| Body: | Sedan | Coupe | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 147 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 184 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 8.8 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 6 engine produces 23 HP less power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 26 NM less than BMW 3 series. Due to the lower power, Mazda 6 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 6.8 | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 6 consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 6 could require 135 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 920 km in combined cycle | |
| 1120 km on highway | 1180 km on highway | ||
| BMW 3 series gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Ground clearance: | 165 mm (6.5 inches) | 143 mm (5.6 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 6 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Mazda 6 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 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: | 13 years | 6 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 2 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 1 sērija | |
| 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 BMW 3 series 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: | 4.76 m | 4.61 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.40 m | |
|
Mazda 6 is larger. Mazda 6 is 14 cm longer than the BMW 3 series, 1 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 6 is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 519 litres | 440 litres | |
|
Mazda 6 has more luggage capacity. Mazda 6 has 79 litres more trunk space than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 6 is 0.8 metres more than that of the BMW 3 series, which means Mazda 6 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`940 | 1`840 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| BMW 3 series has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 6 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than BMW 3 series, so BMW 3 series quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4400 | 10 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 6 has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |