2009 BMW 530 vs. 2006 Mazda 3
To start off, 2009 BMW 530 is newer by 3 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 2,993 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 BMW 530 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 BMW 530 weights approximately 80 kg more than 2006 Mazda 3.
Because 2009 BMW 530 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 2009 BMW 530. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 3, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 BMW 530 | 2006 Mazda 3 | |
| Make | BMW | Mazda |
| Model | 530 | 3 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2993 cc | 1598 cc |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 216 HP | 0 HP |
| Engine Bore Size | 84 mm | 78 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 90 mm | 83.6 mm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1320 kg | 1240 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4850 mm | 4500 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1470 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1850 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2650 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 6.7 L/100km | 8.9 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 55 L |
