Mercedes E class 1989 vs Mazda 626 1990
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Petrol | 2.2 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 132 HP | 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 198 NM | 178 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.5 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
| Mercedes E class engine produces 16 HP more power than Mazda 626, whereas torque is 20 NM more than Mazda 626. Despite the higher power, Mercedes E class reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.9 | 8.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.4 l/100km | 8.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mercedes E class consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mercedes E class could require 255 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mercedes E class consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 72 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 730 km in combined cycle | |
| 690 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| 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: | 630'000 km | 560'000 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: | 13 years | 7 years | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mercedes E class might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mazda 626 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: | 4.76 m | 4.59 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.49 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Mercedes E class is larger. Mercedes E class is 17 cm longer than the Mazda 626, 5 cm wider, while the height of Mercedes E class is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mercedes E class is 0.4 metres more than that of the Mazda 626. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`500 | 1`250 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| 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 (€): | 6600 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes E klase has
|
Mazda 626 has
| |