Mazda 6 2010 vs Mazda 626 1999

Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison

 
Mazda 6
2010 - 2013
Mazda 626
1999 - 2002
Gearbox: Manual/AutomaticManual/Automatic
Engines: 1.8 - 3.71.8 - 2.5

Performance

Power: 120 - 272 HP100 - 167 HP
Torque: 165 - 400 NM152 - 230 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 8.1 - 11.4 seconds9.3 - 12.5 seconds
Select a car version for a more accurate comparison!

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 5.2 - 10.35.2 - 8.9
Mazda 6 petrol engines consumes on average 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than Mazda 626. On average, Mazda 6 equipped with diesel engines consume 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626.
This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version!

Dimensions

Length: 4.78 m4.61 m
Width: 1.80 m1.72 m
Height: 1.44 m1.43 m
Mazda 6 is larger.
Mazda 6 is 17 cm longer than the Mazda 626, 9 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 6 is 1 cm higher.
Trunk capacity: 519 litres502 litres
Mazda 6 has 17 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 626.
Turning diameter: 11.8 meters10.4 meters
The turning circle of the Mazda 6 is 1.4 metres more than that of the Mazda 626, which means Mazda 6 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces.
Gross weight (kg): ~ 1`974~ 1`648
Safety: no datano data
Quality:
above average

above average
Average price (€): 44001000
Pros and Cons: Mazda 6 has
  • lower fuel consumption
  • fewer faults
Mazda 626 has
  • better manoeuvrability
  • lower price
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv