2006 Mazda 3 vs. 2011 Volvo C30
To start off, 2011 Volvo C30 is newer by 5 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. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2011 Volvo C30 weights approximately 331 kg more than 2006 Mazda 3.
Because 2006 Mazda 3 is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2006 Mazda 3. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2011 Volvo C30, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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, 2011 Volvo C30 (350 Nm) has 204 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda 3. (146 Nm). This means 2011 Volvo C30 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Mazda 3 | 2011 Volvo C30 | |
Make | Mazda | Volvo |
Model | 3 | C30 |
Year Released | 2006 | 2011 |
Body Type | Hatchback | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 105 HP | 0 HP |
Torque | 146 Nm | 350 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 3 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1120 kg | 1451 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4710 mm | 4252 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1490 mm | 1448 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2639 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 60 L |