Volkswagen Passat 2002 vs Mazda 626 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 130 HP | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 195 NM | 152 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 11.8 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Passat is more dynamic to drive. Volkswagen Passat engine produces 30 HP more power than Mazda 626, whereas torque is 43 NM more than Mazda 626. Thanks to more power Volkswagen Passat reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.0 | 7.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.1 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Volkswagen Passat consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Passat could require 60 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Passat consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 1030 km on highway | 1030 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 626 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 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 Mazda 626 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Audi A6, Audi A4 | 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Volkswagen Passat 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: | 4.70 m | 4.59 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.43 m | |
|
Volkswagen Passat is larger. Volkswagen Passat is 11 cm longer than the Mazda 626, 4 cm wider, while the height of Volkswagen Passat is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 475 litres | 502 litres | |
|
Mazda 626 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Volkswagen Passat has 27 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 626. This could mean that the Volkswagen Passat uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Passat is 0.6 metres more than that of the Mazda 626, which means Volkswagen Passat can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`930 | 1`685 | |
| 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 Volkswagen Passat, so Mazda 626 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.9/10 | 6.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Passat has
|
Mazda 626 has
| |