2009 Audi S6 vs. 2005 Mazda 3
To start off, 2009 Audi S6 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Mazda 3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Mazda 3 would be higher. At 5,204 cc (10 cylinders), 2009 Audi S6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Audi S6 (435 HP @ 6800 RPM) has 287 more horse power than 2005 Mazda 3. (148 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Audi S6 should accelerate faster than 2005 Mazda 3.
Because 2009 Audi S6 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2005 Mazda 3. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Audi S6 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. Let's talk about torque, 2009 Audi S6 (540 Nm) has 357 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Mazda 3. (183 Nm). This means 2009 Audi S6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Audi S6 | 2005 Mazda 3 | |
| Make | Audi | Mazda |
| Model | S6 | 3 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2005 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5204 cc | 1999 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 10 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 435 HP | 148 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6800 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Torque | 540 Nm | 183 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 84.5 mm | 87 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 92.8 mm | 83 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 12.5:1 | 10.0:1 |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4920 mm | 4540 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2020 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2850 mm | 2650 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.3 L/100km | 6.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 16.9 L/100km | 8.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 14.8 L/100km | 7.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 80 L | 55 L |
