Mazda 626 1999 vs Mitsubishi Carisma 1997
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 174 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.1 seconds | 12.4 seconds | |
| Mazda 626 engine produces 10 HP less power than Mitsubishi Carisma, whereas torque is 4 NM less than Mitsubishi Carisma. Despite less power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.5 | 7.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.7 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Carisma is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 626 consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Carisma, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 626 could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 626 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Carisma. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 940 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 730 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 350'000 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: | 20 years | 23 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volvo V40, Volvo S40, Mitsubishi Galant | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Carisma might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mitsubishi Carisma 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: | 4.59 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.40 m | |
| Mazda 626 is 11 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Carisma, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 626 is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 502 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 660 litres | |
|
Mazda 626 has more luggage capacity. Mazda 626 has 72 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Carisma. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`700 | 1`685 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | Mitsubishi Carisma has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 626 has serious deffects in 115 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Carisma, so Mitsubishi Carisma quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.2/10 | 7.9/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Mitsubishi Carisma has
| |