2006 Mazda 3 vs. 2010 Kia Cee'd
To start off, 2010 Kia Cee'd 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 1,999 cc, 2006 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Mazda 3 (150 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 9 more horse power than 2010 Kia Cee'd. (141 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 3 should accelerate faster than 2010 Kia Cee'd.
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 Kia Cee'd (187 Nm @ 4600 RPM) has 4 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda 3. (183 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2010 Kia Cee'd will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Mazda 3 | 2010 Kia Cee'd | |
Make | Mazda | Kia |
Model | 3 | Cee'd |
Year Released | 2006 | 2010 |
Body Type | Sedan | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1999 cc | 1975 cc |
Horse Power | 150 HP | 141 HP |
Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 183 Nm | 187 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 4600 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4540 mm | 4240 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1800 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1490 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2660 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.6 L/100km | 7.1 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 53 L |