Subaru Impreza 2003 vs Mazda 3 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 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: | 125 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 184 NM | 187 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 seconds | 9 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is a more dynamic driving. Subaru Impreza engine produces 25 HP less power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 3 NM less than Mazda 3. Due to the lower power, Subaru Impreza reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.9 | 8.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.4 l/100km | 8.2 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Subaru Impreza consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Subaru Impreza could require 105 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Subaru Impreza consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 560 km in combined cycle | 670 km in combined cycle | |
| 730 km on highway | 870 km on highway | ||
| 530 km with real consumption | 670 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. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Ground clearance: | 150 mm (5.9 inches) | 160 mm (6.3 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 3 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 Mazda 3 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 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 | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Subaru Forester, Subaru Legacy | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda MX-5, Mazda 5, Mazda CX-5 | |
| 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 2006 2.0 engine: The engine tends to idle unevenly. Engine problems may also include the thermostat and cooling pump. This engine tends to consume more oil at higher mileages. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.42 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.47 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Subaru Impreza is 7 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Subaru Impreza is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 401 litres | 413 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1285 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Subaru Impreza is 0.5 metres less than that of the Mazda 3, which means Subaru Impreza can be easier 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: | 1`760 kg | 1`770 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`330 kg | 1`245 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 430 kg | 525 kg | |
| Subaru Impreza load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 22 procentiem less than Mazda 3. Therefore, Mazda 3 is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 10 600 | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Subaru Impreza has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |