Compare Mazda 6 GJ Sedan vs Renault Talisman facelift vs Renault Talisman
Variants
2.0 145hp
2.0 165hp
2.0 165hp AT
2.2D 150hp
2.2D 150hp AT
2.2D 175hp
2.2D 175hp AT
2.5 AT
1.3 TCe 4CONTROL EDC
1.3 TCe EDC
1.7 Blue dCi
1.7 Blue dCi 4CONTROL
2.0 Blue dCi 160 4CONTROL EDC
2.0 Blue dCi 160 EDC
2.0 Blue dCi 200 4CONTROL EDC
2.0 Blue dCi 200 EDC
TCe 160 4CONTROL
TCe 160 EDC FAP
Energy dCi 110 ECO2
Energy dCi 130
Energy dCi 130 EDC
Energy dCi 160 EDC6
Energy TCe 150 EDC7
Energy TCe 200 EDC7
Blue dCi 150
Blue dCi 150 4CONTROL
Energy TCe 225 4CONTROL EDC FAP
Energy TCe 225 EDC FAP
Blue dCi 200 EDC 4CONTROL EDC
Blue dCi 160 EDC
Blue dCi 200 4CONTROL EDC
Blue dCi 200 EDC
Capacity
Cargo Capacity
489 L / 17.3 cu-ft
608 L / 21.5 cu-ft
608 L / 21.5 cu-ft ~ 1022 L / 36.1 cu-ft
Fuel Capacity
62.0 L / 16.4 gal
Passengers
5
5
5
Chassis
Brakes | Rear
Disc, 290x11 mm
Power Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Suspension | Front
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
Suspension | Rear
Multi-link
Semi-independent, Torsion beam
Semi-independent, coil spring
Tire Size
225/55 R17 97W, 245/45 R18 100W, 245/40 R19 98Y
Construction
Body Style
4-door Sedan
4-door Sedan
4-door Sedan
Dimensions
Ground Clearance
145 mm / 5.7 in
Size | Height
1450 mm / 57.1 in
1463 mm / 57.6 in
1463 mm / 57.6 in
Size | Length
4865 mm / 191.5 in
4848 mm / 190.9 in
4849 mm / 190.9 in
Size | Width
1840 mm / 72.4 in
1869 mm / 73.6 in (mirror unfolded)
Track Width | Front
1614.0 mm / 63.5 in
1614.0 mm / 63.5 in
Track Width | Rear
1609.0 mm / 63.3 in
1609.0 mm / 63.3 in
Wheel Size
17 in, 18 in, 19 in
Wheelbase
2830 mm / 111.4 in
2808 mm / 110.6 in
Performance
Coefficient Of Drag
0.27
Powertrain
Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Emission Standard
Euro 6D Temp
Transmission | Gears
6-speed
Production
Availability
2012 ~ 2015
2020
Reviews
Neofiliac score
28%
6%
7%
Pros
- Very elegant exterior design
- Reliability improved
- Fuel efficient
- Good 0.27 drag coefficient
- Fuel consumption figures can be rather low
Cons
- No powerful engine options
- Suspension downgraded to MacPherson struts
- Poor performance
- Poor build quality
- Bland styling
- Poor suspension setup
- Only available with small engines
- No powerful engine options
- Only available with small engines
- Semi-independent rear suspensions
Remove
Remove
Remove
Add up to 4 products to the comparison using the search bar above
Information on this page is provided on an as-is basis. No warranty on accuracy is implied. This page may contain affiliate links to third-party merchants such as Amazon and eBay. If you make a purchase using the supplied link, we may receive a commission. Neofiliac places the utmost respect for your privacy. We use no cookie whatsoever beyond that needed for the proper functioning of the website.