Subaru Outback 2003 vs Mazda 6 2008
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 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: | 173 HP | 147 HP | |
| Torque: | 227 NM | 184 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 10.3 seconds | |
| Subaru Outback engine produces 26 HP more power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 43 NM more than Mazda 6. Despite the higher power, Subaru Outback reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.7 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.7 l/100km | 8.2 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Subaru Outback consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Subaru Outback could require 225 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Subaru Outback consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 920 km on highway | 1140 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 780 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 6 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) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 370'000 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 Mazda 6 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 3, 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 6 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Mazda 6 2008 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: | 4.73 m | 4.71 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.44 m | |
| Subaru Outback is 2 cm longer than the Mazda 6, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Subaru Outback is 11 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1751 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Subaru Outback is 0.6 metres less than that of the Mazda 6, which means Subaru Outback can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`970 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Subaru Outback has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |