2006 Mazda 3 vs. 2010 Citroen C5
To start off, 2010 Citroen C5 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Mazda 3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Mazda 3 would be higher. At 2,946 cc (6 cylinders), 2010 Citroen C5 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Citroen C5 (204 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 54 more horse power than 2006 Mazda 3. (150 HP @ 6500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Citroen C5 should accelerate faster than 2006 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 Citroen C5 (285 Nm @ 3750 RPM) has 102 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda 3. (183 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2010 Citroen C5 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Mazda 3 | 2010 Citroen C5 | |
Make | Mazda | Citroen |
Model | 3 | C5 |
Year Released | 2006 | 2010 |
Body Type | Sedan | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1999 cc | 2946 cc |
Horse Power | 150 HP | 204 HP |
Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 183 Nm | 285 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 | 4620 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1780 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1480 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2760 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.6 L/100km | 9.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 66 L |