Skoda Octavia 2000 vs Mazda 626 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 230 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.2 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Mazda 626 is a more dynamic driving. Skoda Octavia engine produces 20 HP less power than Mazda 626, whereas torque is 20 NM less than Mazda 626. Due to the lower power, Skoda Octavia reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.0 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.4 l/100km | 5.8 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Octavia is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Skoda Octavia consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626, which means that by driving the Skoda Octavia over 15,000 km in a year you can save 135 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Skoda Octavia consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1100 km in combined cycle | 1080 km in combined cycle | |
| 1300 km on highway | 1250 km on highway | ||
| 1010 km with real consumption | 1100 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 610'000 km | 380'000 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 Skoda Octavia engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Audi A3, Volkswagen Bora, Seat Leon | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 323, Mazda Premacy | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Skoda Octavia might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Skoda Octavia 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. | |||
| Mazda 626 1999 2.0 engine: The engine is reliable if you use quality diesel. Turbine life is not very long, however. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.51 m | 4.59 m | |
| Width: | 1.73 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.43 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Skoda Octavia is 8 cm shorter than the Mazda 626, 2 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 502 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Octavia is 0.4 metres more than that of the Mazda 626, which means Skoda Octavia can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`770 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Mazda 626 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Skoda Octavia, so Mazda 626 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 5.3/10 | 6.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Octavia has
|
Mazda 626 has
| |