Mazda 626 1992 vs Ford Sierra 1990
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Mazda 626 is available only with front wheel drive, while Ford Sierra can be equipped with rear wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive. | |||
| Engines: | 2.0 - 2.2 | 1.6 - 2.0 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 76 - 116 HP | 71 - 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 153 - 180 NM | 119 - 171 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 - 15.6 seconds | 11.4 - 16.4 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.0 - 8.8 | 6.4 - 8.5 | |
|
Mazda 626 petrol engines consumes on average 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than Ford Sierra. On average, Mazda 626 equipped with diesel engines consume 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Sierra. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.59 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.43 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 626 is 8 cm longer than the Ford Sierra, 3 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1315 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.8 metres more than that of the Ford Sierra, which means Mazda 626 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`783 | ~ 1`207 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 600 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Ford Sierra has
| |