Opel Astra 2001 vs Mazda 3 2013
| Body: | Cabrio | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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: | 101 HP | 104 HP | |
| Torque: | 150 NM | 144 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13 seconds | 13 seconds | |
| Opel Astra engine produces 3 HP less power than Mazda 3, but torque is 6 NM more than Mazda 3. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Opel Astra consumes 1.2 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 180 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Opel Astra consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 51 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 860 km in combined cycle | |
| 710 km with real consumption | 710 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 3 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: | 440'000 km | 350'000 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 Opel Astra engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Opel Zafira, Opel Vectra, Opel Meriva | 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Opel Astra 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: | 4.27 m | 4.47 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Opel Astra is smaller. Opel Astra is 20 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Opel Astra is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 330 litres | 364 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1263 litres | |
|
Mazda 3 has more luggage space. Opel Astra has 34 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Opel Astra is 0.4 metres more than that of the Mazda 3, which means Opel Astra can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| 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`695 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Opel Astra has serious deffects in 490 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 7800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Opel Astra has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |