Seat Alhambra 1996 vs Mazda MPV 1996
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Seat Alhambra) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Mazda MPV) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 116 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 277 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 17.2 seconds | 16.4 seconds | |
|
Mazda MPV is a more dynamic driving. Seat Alhambra engine produces 1 HP more power than Mazda MPV, but torque is 107 NM less than Mazda MPV. Despite the higher power, Seat Alhambra reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.5 | 8.9 | |
|
The Mazda MPV is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Seat Alhambra consumes 2.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda MPV, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Seat Alhambra could require 390 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 74 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 600 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| Mazda MPV gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Seat Alhambra) 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 (Mazda MPV) 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 | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 11 years | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda MPV might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Seat Alhambra 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: | 4.62 m | 4.67 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.83 m | |
| Height: | 1.73 m | 1.75 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Seat Alhambra is 5 cm shorter than the Mazda MPV, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Seat Alhambra is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 282 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 282 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1060 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.7 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`800 | 2`370 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1600 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Mazda MPV has
| |