Compare Mazda 6 / Atenza III (GJ) facelift vs Mazda 3 / Axela III facelift (BN) vs Mazda 3 / Axela IV (BP)

Mazda 6 / Atenza III (GJ) facelift

Mazda 3 / Axela III facelift (BN)

Mazda 3 / Axela IV (BP)

Mazda 6 / Atenza III (GJ) faceliftMazda 3 / Axela III facelift (BN)Mazda 3 / Axela IV (BP)
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
1.5 SkyActiv-D
2.0 SkyActiv-G
2.0 SkyActiv-G AT
2.2 SkyActiv-D
2.5 SkyActiv-G
2.5 SkyActiv-G AT
1.5 118 AT
1.8D 116
1.8D 116 AT
2.0 122
2.0 122 AT
2.0 162 AT
2.0 SkyActiv-X 181
2.0 SkyActiv-X 181 AT
2.5 186 AT
2.5 186 AWD AT

Reviews

Neofiliac score27%35%48%
Pros
  • Down to very low 3.9L/100km fuel consumption
  • Good towing capacity
  • Good exterior and interior design
  • Down to very low 3.8L/100km fuel consumption
  • Good towing capacity
  • Interesting Skyactiv-X engine
  • Improved styling
  • Good engine reliability
Cons
  • No powerful engine options
  • GPF ruins many good petrol engines
  • Stuck with MacPherson strut
  • No powerful engine options
  • Stuck with MacPherson struts in the front
  • No independent rear suspension

Price

Offers (incl. referral links)
RemoveRemoveRemove
Add up to 3 products to the comparison using the search bar above
Information on this page is provided on a best effort basis. 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 respects your privacy. We do not track your activity on this website.