2006 Mazda 3 vs. 2004 Renault Grand Scenic
To start off, 2006 Mazda 3 is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Renault Grand Scenic. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Renault Grand Scenic would be higher. At 1,999 cc, 2006 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Mazda 3 (150 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 17 more horse power than 2004 Renault Grand Scenic. (133 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 3 should accelerate faster than 2004 Renault Grand Scenic.
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, 2004 Renault Grand Scenic (200 Nm @ 3750 RPM) has 17 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda 3. (183 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2004 Renault Grand Scenic will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Mazda 3 | 2004 Renault Grand Scenic | |
Make | Mazda | Renault |
Model | 3 | Grand Scenic |
Year Released | 2006 | 2004 |
Body Type | Sedan | Minivan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1999 cc | 1997 cc |
Horse Power | 150 HP | 133 HP |
Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 183 Nm | 200 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 3750 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4540 mm | 4500 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1820 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1640 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2570 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.6 L/100km | 8.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 60 L |