Mazda 626 1992 vs Volkswagen Passat 1997
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 101 HP | |
| Torque: | 153 NM | 140 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 13 seconds | |
|
Mazda 626 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 626 engine produces 11 HP less power than Volkswagen Passat, but torque is 13 NM more than Volkswagen Passat. Despite less power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.3 | 8.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 8.7 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Mazda 626 consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Passat, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 626 could require 15 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda 626 consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Passat. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 750 km with real consumption | 710 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 460'000 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 Volkswagen Passat engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 1 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Audi A4 | |
| 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 Volkswagen Passat 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 | 4.67 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.50 m | |
|
Mazda 626 is smaller. Mazda 626 is 8 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Passat, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 626 is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1315 litres | no data | |
|
Volkswagen Passat has more luggage space. Mazda 626 has 65 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Passat. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.2 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Passat. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`760 | 1`820 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Mazda 626 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Passat has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Mazda 626, so Mazda 626 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 1200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.4/10 | 7.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Volkswagen Passat has
| |