Volvo S90 1997 vs Mazda 626 1997
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Volvo S90 is available with rear wheel drive, while Mazda 626 can be equipped with front wheel drive. | |||
| Engines: | 2.9 (petrol) | 1.8 - 2.0 (petrol, diesel) | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 180 - 204 HP | 90 - 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 260 - 267 NM | 145 - 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9 - 9.2 seconds | 9.9 - 12.6 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.0 - 11.7 | 5.2 - 8.5 | |
|
Volvo S90 petrol engines consumes on average 3.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than Mazda 626. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.87 m | 4.58 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.43 m | |
|
Volvo S90 is larger, but slightly lower. Volvo S90 is 29 cm longer than the Mazda 626, 4 cm wider, while the height of Volvo S90 is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 502 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 9.7 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo S90 is 0.7 metres less than that of the Mazda 626, which means Volvo S90 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`600 | ~ 1`709 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo S90 has
|
Mazda 626 has
| |