Seat Toledo 1999 vs Mazda 3 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Seat Toledo) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Mazda 3) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 235 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.2 seconds | 11 seconds | |
| Seat Toledo engine produces 5 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 90 NM more than Mazda 3. Despite the higher power, Seat Toledo reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.0 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.5 l/100km | 7.8 l/100km | |
|
The Seat Toledo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Seat Toledo consumes 2.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that by driving the Seat Toledo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 330 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Seat Toledo consumes 2.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1100 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 1340 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| 1000 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Seat Toledo 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: | 560'000 km | 420'000 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 Seat Toledo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Audi A6, Seat Alhambra, Seat Leon | 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. | |||
| Mazda 3 2003 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 2003 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.44 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.46 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Seat Toledo is 5 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Seat Toledo is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 413 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 675 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Seat Toledo is 0.6 metres more than that of the Mazda 3, which means Seat Toledo can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`400 | 1`675 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Seat Toledo has serious deffects in 85 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Seat Toledo has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |