Mazda 626 1999 vs SAAB 9-3 1998
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 130 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 177 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.1 seconds | 13 seconds | |
| Mazda 626 engine produces 15 HP less power than SAAB 9-3, whereas torque is 7 NM less than SAAB 9-3. Despite less power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.5 | 10.1 | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 626 consumes 1.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the SAAB 9-3, which means that by driving the Mazda 626 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 240 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 68 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 670 km in combined cycle | |
| 940 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| Mazda 626 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 480'000 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 SAAB 9-3 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including SAAB 9000, SAAB 900 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The SAAB 9-3 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 | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.44 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 626 is 5 cm shorter than the SAAB 9-3, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 626 is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 502 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.1 metres less than that of the SAAB 9-3. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`700 | 1`600 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| SAAB 9-3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 626 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than SAAB 9-3, so SAAB 9-3 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.2/10 | 7.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
SAAB 9-3 has
| |