Nissan Almera 2000 vs Mazda 3 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 84 HP | |
| Torque: | 128 NM | 122 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.8 seconds | 14.3 seconds | |
|
Nissan Almera is more dynamic to drive. Nissan Almera engine produces 6 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 6 NM more than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power Nissan Almera reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 7.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.5 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km | |
|
By specification Nissan Almera consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that by driving the Nissan Almera over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Nissan Almera consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 900 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 1090 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
| 800 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan Almera gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 330'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Mazda 2 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Mazda 3 2004 1.4 engine: The engine is generally robust, but the use of poor-quality fuel can lead to increased burn formation. Idling speeds tend to be unstable. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.18 m | 4.42 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Nissan Almera is smaller. Nissan Almera is 24 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Almera is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 355 litres | 300 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1100 litres | 635 litres | |
|
Nissan Almera has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Nissan Almera has 55 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. The Mazda 3 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Almera (by 465 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Almera is 0.1 metres more than that of the Mazda 3. | |||
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`690 | 1`695 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Almera has serious deffects in 215 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Almera has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |