2003 Mazda 3 vs. 2006 Mazda 6
To start off, 2006 Mazda 6 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Mazda 3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Mazda 3 would be higher. At 2,964 cc, 2006 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Mazda 6 (215 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 55 more horse power than 2003 Mazda 3. (160 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 2003 Mazda 3. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Mazda 3 weights approximately 430 kg more than 2006 Mazda 6.
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, 2006 Mazda 6 (270 Nm @ 5000 RPM) has 75 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Mazda 3. (195 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2006 Mazda 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Mazda 3 | 2006 Mazda 6 | |
| Make | Mazda | Mazda |
| Model | 3 | 6 |
| Year Released | 2003 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1999 cc | 2964 cc |
| Horse Power | 160 HP | 215 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 195 Nm | 270 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 3 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1240 kg | 810 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 4780 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1790 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1460 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2850 mm | 2680 mm |
| Fuel Consumption City | 11.7 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 8.4 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 68 L |
