Opel Astra 2004 vs Mazda 3 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 150 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.3 seconds | 12.7 seconds | |
| Opel Astra and Mazda 3 have the same engine power, but Opel Astra torque is 5 NM more than Mazda 3. Opel Astra reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.5 | 7.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 8.7 l/100km | |
|
The Opel Astra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Opel Astra consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that by driving the Opel Astra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 195 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Opel Astra consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 850 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
| Opel Astra gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 160 mm (6.3 inches) | 160 mm (6.3 inches) | |
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: | 7 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Opel Zafira, Opel Vectra, Opel Meriva | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda Xedos 6, Mazda MX-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 3 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 3 2006 1.6 engine: This engine is widely regarded as reliable, though it can develop certain issues over time. One of the most common problems is increased oil consumption, often starting after 120,000 km. This is frequently ... More about Mazda 3 2006 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.25 m | 4.42 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Opel Astra is smaller. Opel Astra is 17 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 1 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 380 litres | 300 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1330 litres | 635 litres | |
|
Opel Astra has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Opel Astra has 80 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 Opel Astra (by 695 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Opel Astra is 0.4 metres less than that of the Mazda 3, which means Opel Astra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`740 | 1`750 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Opel Astra has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mazda 3, so Opel Astra quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 2000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.5/10 | 8.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Opel Astra has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |