2009 BMW M3 vs. 2003 Mazda 3
To start off, 2009 BMW M3 is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Mazda 3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Mazda 3 would be higher. At 3,999 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 BMW M3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 BMW M3 (414 HP @ 8300 RPM) has 271 more horse power than 2003 Mazda 3. (143 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 BMW M3 should accelerate faster than 2003 Mazda 3.
Because 2009 BMW M3 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 M3. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 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. Let's talk about torque, 2009 BMW M3 (295 Nm @ 3900 RPM) has 108 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Mazda 3. (187 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2009 BMW M3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
2009 BMW M3 | 2003 Mazda 3 | |
Make | BMW | Mazda |
Model | M3 | 3 |
Year Released | 2009 | 2003 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3999 cc | 1970 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 414 HP | 143 HP |
Engine RPM | 8300 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 295 Nm | 187 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3900 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 12.0:1 | 10.8:1 |
Top Speed | 249 km/hour | 200 km/hour |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4590 mm | 4430 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1760 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1470 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2770 mm | 2730 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.9 L/100km | 6.5 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 17 L/100km | 11.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 14.9 L/100km | 8.4 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 63 L | 55 L |