Audi 80 1992 vs Mazda 626 1992
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 148 NM | 153 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.1 seconds | 11.9 seconds | |
|
Mazda 626 is a more dynamic driving. Audi 80 and Mazda 626 have the same engine power, but Audi 80 torque is 5 NM less than Mazda 626. Audi 80 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.8 | 8.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.9 l/100km | 7.9 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Audi 80 consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Audi 80 could require 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Audi 80 consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 66 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 740 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 500'000 km | 420'000 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 Audi 80 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 20 years | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 626 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Audi 80 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: | 4.48 m | 4.59 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.43 m | |
| Audi 80 is 11 cm shorter than the Mazda 626, 1 cm wider, while the height of Audi 80 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 370 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1200 litres | 1315 litres | |
|
Mazda 626 has more luggage space. Audi 80 has 60 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 626. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 626 (by 115 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Audi 80 is 0.4 metres more than that of the Mazda 626. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`780 | 1`760 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Mazda 626 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Audi 80 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Mazda 626, so Mazda 626 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.3/10 | 7.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi 80 has
|
Mazda 626 has
| |