Mazda 6 2002 vs Nissan Qashqai 2010
| Body: | Sedan | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.3 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 166 HP | 141 HP | |
| Torque: | 207 NM | 196 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
Mazda 6 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 6 engine produces 25 HP more power than Nissan Qashqai, whereas torque is 11 NM more than Nissan Qashqai. Thanks to more power Mazda 6 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.9 | 8.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.2 l/100km | 8.9 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Qashqai is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 6 consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Qashqai, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 6 could require 105 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 6 consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Qashqai. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 790 km in combined cycle | |
| 910 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan Qashqai gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 130 mm (5.1 inches) | 201 mm (7.9 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Nissan Qashqai 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Nissan Serena | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Qashqai might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Mazda 6 2002 2.3 engine: The most common problems with this engine are with the cooling system pump and thermostat, as well as with the engine cushions (which can cause vibrations), the lambda sensor and the intake manifold adjuster. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.67 m | 4.33 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.62 m | |
| Mazda 6 is 34 cm longer than the Nissan Qashqai, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 6 is 18 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 500 litres | 410 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1513 litres | |
|
Mazda 6 has more luggage capacity. Mazda 6 has 90 litres more trunk space than the Nissan Qashqai. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 6 is 0.2 metres more than that of the Nissan Qashqai. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`885 | 1`960 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | Nissan Qashqai has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 6 has serious deffects in 385 percent more cases than Nissan Qashqai, so Nissan Qashqai quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 7000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.3/10 | 7.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 6 has
|
Nissan Qashqai has
| |