Opel Astra 2012 vs Mazda 3 2011
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 180 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 seconds | 12.2 seconds | |
|
Opel Astra is more dynamic to drive. Opel Astra engine produces 75 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 85 NM more than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power Opel Astra reaches 100 km/h speed 3.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.8 | 6.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.9 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Opel Astra consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Opel Astra could require 60 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Opel Astra consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 56 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 1050 km on highway | ||
| 620 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 165 mm (6.5 inches) | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Opel Astra 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. Note, however, that this Opel Astra version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Opel Insignia | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.42 m | 4.46 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.51 m | 1.45 m | |
| Opel Astra is 4 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 6 cm wider, while the height of Opel Astra is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 370 litres | 340 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1235 litres | 1360 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Opel Astra has 30 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 Mazda 3 (by 125 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.5 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Opel Astra is 1.1 metres more than that of the Mazda 3, which means Opel Astra can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`965 | 1`770 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Opel Astra has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5000 | 4800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Opel Astra has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |