Volvo 960 1990 vs Mazda 626 1988
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Volvo 960 is available with rear wheel drive, while Mazda 626 can be equipped with front wheel drive. | |||
| Engines: | 2.0 - 2.9 | 1.8 - 2.2 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 - 204 HP | 61 - 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 225 - 280 NM | 121 - 178 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9 - 12.5 seconds | 10.5 - 20.8 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.2 - 11.2 | 6.9 - 9.2 | |
|
Volvo 960 petrol engines consumes on average 2.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than Mazda 626. On average, Volvo 960 equipped with diesel engines consume 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.83 m | 4.59 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Volvo 960 is larger, but slightly lower. Volvo 960 is 24 cm longer than the Mazda 626, 6 cm wider, while the height of Volvo 960 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 992 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2125 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 9.9 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo 960 is 0.9 metres less than that of the Mazda 626, which means Volvo 960 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`063 | ~ 1`066 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 3000 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo 960 has
|
Mazda 626 has
| |