2009 BMW M3 vs. 2013 Mazda 3
To start off, 2013 Mazda 3 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 BMW M3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 BMW M3 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 259 more horse power than 2013 Mazda 3. (155 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 BMW M3 should accelerate faster than 2013 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, 2013 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 95 more torque (in Nm) than 2013 Mazda 3. (200 Nm @ 4100 RPM). This means 2009 BMW M3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2013 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
2009 BMW M3 | 2013 Mazda 3 | |
Make | BMW | Mazda |
Model | M3 | 3 |
Year Released | 2009 | 2013 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3999 cc | 1998 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 414 HP | 155 HP |
Engine RPM | 8300 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 295 Nm | 200 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3900 RPM | 4100 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 12.0:1 | 12.0:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4590 mm | 4595 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1755 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1470 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2770 mm | 2640 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.9 L/100km | 6.9 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 17 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 63 L | 55 L |