Mazda 626 1990 vs Mercedes E class 1992
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Petrol | 2.2 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: | 116 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 178 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 10.8 seconds | |
| Mazda 626 engine produces 34 HP less power than Mercedes E class, whereas torque is 32 NM less than Mercedes E class. Despite less power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.2 | 9.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 9.2 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 626 consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes E class, which means that by driving the Mazda 626 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 210 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 626 consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes E class. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 72 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 690 km with real consumption | 780 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Mazda 626) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Mercedes E class) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 600'000 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 Mercedes E class engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 8 years | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.59 m | 4.76 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.49 m | |
|
Mazda 626 is smaller. Mazda 626 is 17 cm shorter than the Mercedes E class, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 626 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.4 metres less than that of the Mercedes E class. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`250 | 2`100 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Mercedes E class has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 626 has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than Mercedes E class, so Mercedes E class quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2200 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Mercedes E klase has
| |