Volkswagen Passat 1985 vs Mazda 626 1997

 
Volkswagen Passat
1985 - 1986
Mazda 626
1997 - 1999
Body: HatchbackSedan
The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area.
Gearbox: AutomaticAutomatic
Engine: 2.0 Petrol2.0 Petrol

Performance

Power: 115 HP115 HP
Torque: 165 NM170 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 12.8 seconds12.4 seconds
Mazda 626 is a more dynamic driving.
Volkswagen Passat and Mazda 626 have the same engine power, but Volkswagen Passat torque is 5 NM less than Mazda 626. Volkswagen Passat reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds later.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 9.18.5
The Mazda 626 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
Volkswagen Passat consumes 0.6 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 90 litres more fuel.
Fuel tank capacity: 60 litres64 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 650 km in combined cycle750 km in combined cycle
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.

Dimensions

Length: 4.42 m4.58 m
Width: 1.71 m1.71 m
Height: 1.38 m1.43 m
Volkswagen Passat is 16 cm shorter than the Mazda 626, width is practically the same , while the height of Volkswagen Passat is 5 cm lower.
Trunk capacity: no data502 litres
Turning diameter: 10.7 meters10.4 meters
The turning circle of the Volkswagen Passat is 0.3 metres more than that of the Mazda 626.
Gross weight (kg): 1`5001`700
Safety: no datano data
Quality: no data
above average
Average price (€): 1800800
Pros and Cons:
    Mazda 626 has
    • lower fuel consumption
    • more full fuel tank mileage
    • lower price
    Share these results to social networks or e-mail
    Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv