Volkswagen Passat 1986 vs Mazda 626 1997

 
Volkswagen Passat
1986 - 1987
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: 113 HP115 HP
Torque: 165 NM170 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 13 seconds12.4 seconds
Mazda 626 is a more dynamic driving.
Volkswagen Passat engine produces 2 HP less power than Mazda 626, whereas torque is 5 NM less than Mazda 626. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Passat reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 9.58.5
The Mazda 626 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
Volkswagen Passat consumes 1 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 150 litres more fuel.
Fuel tank capacity: 60 litres64 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 630 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