2004 Alfa Romeo 156 vs. 2006 Mazda 3
To start off, 2006 Mazda 3 is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Alfa Romeo 156. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Alfa Romeo 156 would be higher. At 1,910 cc (4 cylinders), 2004 Alfa Romeo 156 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Alfa Romeo 156 weights approximately 285 kg more than 2006 Mazda 3.
Because 2004 Alfa Romeo 156 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Mazda 3. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Alfa Romeo 156 will offer significantly more control. 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Alfa Romeo 156 | 2006 Mazda 3 | |
| Make | Alfa Romeo | Mazda |
| Model | 156 | 3 |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Station Wagon | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1910 cc | 1598 cc |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 148 HP | 0 HP |
| Engine Bore Size | 82 mm | 78 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 90.4 mm | 83.6 mm |
| Acceleration 0-100mph | 10.5 seconds | 11.3 seconds |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1525 kg | 1240 kg |
| Vehicle Width | 1750 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2650 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 6.8 L/100km | 8.9 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 63 L | 55 L |
