Compare two cars

Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion

Car #1
Make
Model
Variant
Engine
Car #2
Make
Model
Variant
Engine

compare selected cars
2005. - 2008.
C - Small family car
hatchback, 5 door
front
Badges
Production
Vehicle class
Body style
Wheel drive
Safety
2003. - 2009.
C - Small family car
hatchback, 5 door
front

Marketing

!function(v,t,o){var a=t.createElement("script");a.src="https://ad.vidverto.io/vidverto/js/aries/v1/invocation.js",a.setAttribute("fetchpriority","high");var r=v.top;r.document.head.appendChild(a),v.self!==v.top&&(v.frameElement.style.cssText="width:0px!important;height:0px!important;"),r.aries=r.aries||{},r.aries.v1=r.aries.v1||{commands:[]};var c=r.aries.v1;c.commands.push((function(){var d=document.getElementById("_vidverto-725dc94bb887f000f0b279c49613751c");d.setAttribute("id",(d.getAttribute("id")+(new Date()).getTime()));var t=v.frameElement||d;c.mount("10285",t,{width:720,height:405})}))}(window,document); */ ?>

Dimensons & Outlines

4342 mm
1840 mm
1447 mm
385 liters
1245 liters
55 liters
Length
Width
Height
Boot (min)
Boot (max)
Fuel tank
4415 mm
1755 mm
1465 mm
346 liters
1285 liters
55 liters
2005 Ford Focus
2003 Mazda 3

Engine

Peugeot / Ford
1.6 DV6 TED4
Diesel
4 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Turbo
1560 cc
110 hp
240 Nm
Engine
Fuel
Configuration
Aspiration
Displacement
Power
Torque
Peugeot / Ford
1.6 DV6 TED4
Diesel
4 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Turbo
1560 cc
110 hp
240 Nm

Performance (manual gearbox)

manual gearbox - 5 gears
1270 kg
10.9 s
188 km/h
6.2 l/100km
4.0 l/100km
4.8 l/100km
127 g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
manual gearbox - 5 gears
1250 kg
11.5 s
182 km/h
6.2 l/100km
4.3 l/100km
5.0 l/100km
138 g/km

Performance (automatic gearbox)

cvt - gears
1296 kg
11.5 s
183 km/h
6.9 l/100km
4.7 l/100km
5.5 l/100km
146 g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
 
kg
s
km/h
l/100km
l/100km
l/100km
g/km

Expenses

1600 EUR
Price from
1700 EUR

Virtual Adviser's™ opinion

Overview

Well, these are two pretty similar cars we have here! It's only details that could potentially make the difference. Not only that they both belong to the small family car segment and utilize the same 5-door hatchback body style, they are even powered by the same Peugeot-developed diesel engine! There is not much there to point us towards one vehicle or the other. Or is it?

Safety

A starting point here would be to take a look at the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests which were performed on both of the cars, with the Ford being a slightly better choice apparently. Moving further on, let's take a closer look at some additional safety-related facts. Both vehicles belong to the small family car segment, which is generally classifying them somewhere in the middle safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. Furthermore, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the American car offers a marginal difference of 2% more metal.

Reliability

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, all the models observed together. These are the results of an independent reasearch, while our visitors describe reliability of Ford with an average rating of 4.5, and models under the Mazda badge with 4.4 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Focus as average reliability-wise, and 3 is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as these two vehicles rank it on average as 4.4 out of 5.

Performance & Fuel economy

Ford is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.6 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 188 kilometers per hour, 6km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 4.9 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (58 mpg), in combined cycle.


Verdict

Mazda appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In my opinion, everything taken into account, the American car offers much better overall protection, which launches it ahead of the other contender. It all continues in the same direction, with Ford being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but Ford. In any case that's my personal view, built upon all the data available to me. What should decide here though is the way you feel about the two vehicles, and I hope you'll find my guidelines useful in the process. Also, you could use the oportunity to find out which car, everything taken into account, would be the perfect choice for you in the eyes of the virtual adviser, among more than 12.000 different ones in our database.

Check a car by its VIN number

Follow us

AutoManiac Instagram

AutoManiac Facebook

AutoManiac database currently covers:

47worldwide automotive brands
1.592different vehicle models
2.311engines
14.428specific cars