Mazda 6 2010 vs Mazda 6 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 147 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 184 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
Mazda 6 2012 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 6 2010 engine produces 3 HP less power than Mazda 6 2012, whereas torque is 26 NM less than Mazda 6 2012. Due to the lower power, Mazda 6 2010 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 6.1 | |
|
The Mazda 6 2012 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 6 2010 consumes 1.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6 2012, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 6 2010 could require 240 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 1010 km in combined cycle | |
| 1120 km on highway | 1260 km on highway | ||
| Mazda 6 2012 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 13 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 4 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda MX-5, Mazda CX-5, Mazda CX-3 | |
| 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 Mazda 6 2012 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. Mazda 6 2012 2.0 engine: This engine is not well-suited for low-quality fuel, as it quickly clogs the fuel system. The use of substandard fuel often leads to the failure of expensive ignition coils, resulting in significant repair ... More about Mazda 6 2012 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.76 m | 4.87 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Mazda 6 2010 is smaller. Mazda 6 2010 is 12 cm shorter than the Mazda 6 2012, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 6 2010 is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 519 litres | 483 litres | |
|
Mazda 6 2010 has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Mazda 6 2010 has 36 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 6 2012. The Mazda 6 2012 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 6 2010 is 1.6 metres more than that of the Mazda 6 2012, which means Mazda 6 2010 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`940 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Average price (€): | 4800 | 7000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 6 has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |