2002 Mazda 6 vs. 2010 Mazda 3
To start off, 2010 Mazda 3 is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Mazda 6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Mazda 6 would be higher. At 1,798 cc (4 cylinders), 2002 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Mazda 6 (120 HP @ 5300 RPM) has 7 more horse power than 2010 Mazda 3. (113 HP @ 3600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2002 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 2010 Mazda 3.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2010 Mazda 3 (270 Nm @ 1750 RPM) has 102 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Mazda 6. (168 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2010 Mazda 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Mazda 6.
Compare all specifications:
2002 Mazda 6 | 2010 Mazda 3 | |
Make | Mazda | Mazda |
Model | 6 | 3 |
Year Released | 2002 | 2010 |
Body Type | Station Wagon | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1798 cc | 1560 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 120 HP | 113 HP |
Engine RPM | 5300 RPM | 3600 RPM |
Torque | 168 Nm | 270 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 1750 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | 5-speed manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4690 mm | 4590 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1755 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1471 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2639 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 55 L |