2002 • Mazda
Atenza
Mazda Atenza 2.3 i 16V (178 Hp) 2002Overall Score69.25/100
2002 Mazda Atenza vs 2002 Saab 9-3 Comparison
Compare technical specifications, scores and everyday-use differences side by side.
2002 • Saab
9-3
Saab 9-3 2.0 i TS (200 Hp) 2002Overall Score68.5/100
WINNER
Mazda Atenza
Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points.
69.25–68.5
SPECIFICATION GROUPS
Every difference between the two cars
Basic Specifications
Mazda AtenzaSpecificationSaab 9-3
MazdaMakeSaab
AtenzaModel9-3
2002Model year2002
SedanBody typeHatchback
5Seats5
4Doors3/5
Performance
Mazda AtenzaSpecificationSaab 9-3
—0–100 km/h7,3 s
180 km/hTop speed235 km/h
2261 ccEngine displacement1985 cc
178 HPPower200 HP
216 NmTorque283 Nm
4Cylinders4
Fuel & Consumption
Mazda AtenzaSpecificationSaab 9-3
PetrolFuel typePetrol
64 ltFuel tank68 lt
—Urban consumption14 lt
—Extra-urban consumption7,3 lt
Transmission & Chassis
Mazda AtenzaSpecificationSaab 9-3
Front-wheel driveDrivetrainFront-wheel drive
4Gears5
195/65 R15 91 HTyre size205/50 R16
YesABSYes
Dimensions
Mazda AtenzaSpecificationSaab 9-3
4745 mmLength4629 mm
1780 mmWidth1711 mm
1440 mmHeight1428 mm
1340 KgWeight1370 Kg
2675 mmWheelbase2605 mm
E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note
2002 Mazda Atenza and 2002 Saab 9-3 approach the same decision from different angles. We compare the exact versions so changes in engine, transmission, dimensions and equipment are not hidden behind the model names.
Overall, Mazda Atenza leads the E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points. The score provides a consistent summary, while the best choice can still change with priorities such as urban efficiency, luggage space, performance or equipment.
SIMILAR COMPARISONS
Similar comparisons
Explore related comparisons featuring cars from this matchup.
VS
VS
VS
VS
VSComments are loading…