Seal 6 Design vs Mazda 3 Sedan 2.0L Evolve Comparison
Car Information
Engine / Motor
180
/
Dimensions
5
5 Seater
1630
/
4
/
4830
/
1875
/
1495
/
2790
/
491
/
Fuel Economy
16.95
18.2
Comfort
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Interior
Dual
/
Infotainment
12.8"
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Battery/Charging
3.3
/
Transmission
eCVT
Automatic
Chassis & Steering
Front Drive
/
Wheels/brakes
✓
/
Key Spec
1.5
2.0 L - 2.0 L
174
153 BHP - 153 BHP
eCVT
6 SPEED SKYACTIV WITH SPORTS MODE & Automatic
Hybrid
Gasoline
TBD
TBD
5
5 - 5
Exterior
✓
/
✓
/
Engine
1.5
2.0 L
Hybrid
Gasoline
174
153 BHP
Motor
Lithium iron phosphate battery
/
161
/
Technologies
✓
/
✓
/
Comparison of configuration highlights
Seal 6 Design
- Push Button Start
- Keyless Entry
- Parking sensor rear
- Rear Camera
Mazda 3 Sedan 2.0L Evolve
Review Comparison
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Related comparisons
Editor's PickMazda 3 Sedan 2.0L Evolve
Expert / Editor Recommendation
Choose Seal 6 Design if you care more about power; choose Mazda 3 Sedan 2.0L Evolve if you care more about price.
Popular Car Comparisons
Q&A
- According to fuel consumption data, Seal 6 Design has a fuel consumption of 5.9, while Mazda 3 Sedan 2.0L Evolve has a fuel consumption of 5.49. Therefore, Mazda 3 Sedan 2.0L Evolve is more fuel-efficient.
- In terms of interior space, Seal 6 Design has a wheelbase of 2790, while Mazda 3 Sedan 2.0L Evolve has a wheelbase of No data. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, No data, offers more room.
- Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. Seal 6 Design uses Front Drive, while Mazda 3 Sedan 2.0L Evolve uses No data.