Mazda 626 1997 vs Rover 400 1995

 
Mazda 626
1997 - 1999
Rover 400
1995 - 1999
Gearbox: ManualManual
Engine: 1.8 Petrol1.6 Petrol
Camshaft drive: Timing beltTiming belt

Performance

Power: 90 HP112 HP
Torque: 145 NM145 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 12.6 seconds10.8 seconds
Rover 400 is a more dynamic driving.
Mazda 626 engine produces 22 HP less power than Rover 400, the torque is the same for both cars. Due to the lower power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 7.67.1
Real fuel consumption: 8.3 l/100km7.9 l/100km
The Rover 400 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
By specification Mazda 626 consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Rover 400, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 626 could require 75 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 Rover 400.
Fuel tank capacity: 64 litres55 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 840 km in combined cycle770 km in combined cycle
1030 km on highway1010 km on highway
770 km with real consumption690 km with real consumption
Mazda 626 gets more mileage on one fuel tank.

Engines

Average engine lifespan: 560'000 km390'000 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: 7 years10 years
Engine spread: Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 323, Mazda PremacyInstalled on at least 3 other car models, including Rover 25, Rover 200, Rover 45
In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Rover 400 might be a better choice in this respect.
Hydraulic tappets: noyes
The Rover 400 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: 4.58 m4.32 m
Width: 1.71 m1.70 m
Height: 1.43 m1.39 m
Mazda 626 is larger.
Mazda 626 is 26 cm longer than the Rover 400, 1 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 626 is 4 cm higher.
Trunk capacity: 502 litres370 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
no data720 litres
Mazda 626 has more luggage capacity.
Mazda 626 has 132 litres more trunk space than the Rover 400.
Turning diameter: 10.4 meters10.3 meters
The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.1 metres more than that of the Rover 400.
Gross weight (kg): 1`6801`640
Safety: no datano data
Quality:
above average
no data
Average price (€): 800no data
Pros and Cons: Mazda 626 has
  • more full fuel tank mileage
  • longer expected engine lifespan
  • roomier boot
Rover 400 has
  • more power
  • more dynamic
  • lower fuel consumption
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv