Mazda 6 2005 vs Chevrolet Epica 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 121 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
|
Chevrolet Epica is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 6 engine produces 29 HP less power than Chevrolet Epica, the torque is the same for both cars. Due to the lower power, Mazda 6 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 6.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mazda 6 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Epica, which means that by driving the Mazda 6 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 6 consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Epica. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1060 km in combined cycle | 1060 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km with real consumption | 940 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 390'000 km | 530'000 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 Chevrolet Epica engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda 5 | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Chevrolet Captiva, Opel Antara, Chevrolet Cruze | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Chevrolet Epica might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Chevrolet Epica 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: | 4.69 m | 4.80 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Mazda 6 is smaller. Mazda 6 is 11 cm shorter than the Chevrolet Epica, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 6 is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 501 litres | 480 litres | |
|
Mazda 6 has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Mazda 6 has 21 litres more trunk space than the Chevrolet Epica. The Chevrolet Epica may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`980 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 2400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.7/10 | 8.5/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 6 has
|
Chevrolet Epica has
| |