Ford Scorpio 1992 vs Mazda 626 1994
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 92 HP | 76 HP | |
| Torque: | 201 NM | 172 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14 seconds | 14.7 seconds | |
|
Ford Scorpio is more dynamic to drive. Ford Scorpio engine produces 16 HP more power than Mazda 626, whereas torque is 29 NM more than Mazda 626. Thanks to more power Ford Scorpio reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 6.8 | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Ford Scorpio consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Scorpio could require 150 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 890 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Mazda 626) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Ford Scorpio) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.67 m | 4.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.39 m | |
| Ford Scorpio is 3 cm shorter than the Mazda 626, 1 cm wider, while the height of Ford Scorpio is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 455 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 747 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Scorpio is 0.2 metres less than that of the Mazda 626. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`300 | 1`715 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Mazda 626 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Scorpio has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Mazda 626, so Mazda 626 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | no data | 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Scorpio has
|
Mazda 626 has
| |