Mazda 626 1999 vs Ford Mondeo 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Double-row 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: | 110 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 245 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 13.7 seconds | |
|
Mazda 626 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 626 engine produces 20 HP more power than Ford Mondeo, but torque is 15 NM less than Ford Mondeo. Thanks to more power Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.3 | 5.9 | |
|
The Ford Mondeo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 626 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Mondeo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 626 could require 60 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1010 km in combined cycle | 940 km in combined cycle | |
| 1160 km on highway | 1210 km on highway | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 323, Mazda Premacy | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 626 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Ford Mondeo 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: | 4.68 m | 4.80 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Mazda 626 is smaller, but higher. Mazda 626 is 12 cm shorter than the Ford Mondeo, 10 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 626 is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 485 litres | 540 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1677 litres | 1700 litres | |
|
Ford Mondeo has more luggage space. Mazda 626 has 55 litres less trunk space than the Ford Mondeo. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford Mondeo (by 23 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 11.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.3 metres less than that of the Ford Mondeo. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`935 | 2`140 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Mazda 626 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Ford Mondeo, so Mazda 626 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.2/10 | 7.5/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Ford Mondeo has
| |