Kia RIO 2000 vs Mazda 626 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 115 NM | 152 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.3 seconds | 11.8 seconds | |
|
Mazda 626 is a more dynamic driving. Kia RIO engine produces 25 HP less power than Mazda 626, whereas torque is 37 NM less than Mazda 626. Due to the lower power, Kia RIO reaches 100 km/h speed 2.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.3 | 7.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.5 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Kia RIO consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626, which means that by driving the Kia RIO over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Kia RIO consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 610 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 730 km on highway | 1030 km on highway | ||
| 520 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 626 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 560'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mazda 626 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 323, Mazda Premacy | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 626 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Kia RIO engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.22 m | 4.59 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.43 m | |
|
Kia RIO is smaller, but slightly higher. Kia RIO is 37 cm shorter than the Mazda 626, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Kia RIO is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 449 litres | 502 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1277 litres | no data | |
|
Mazda 626 has more luggage space. Kia RIO has 53 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 626. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.5 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Kia RIO is 0.9 metres less than that of the Mazda 626, which means Kia RIO can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`471 | 1`685 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Mazda 626 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Kia RIO has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Mazda 626, so Mazda 626 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | no data | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Kia RIO has
|
Mazda 626 has
| |