Audi A6 1998 vs Mazda 626 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 235 NM | 230 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.9 seconds | 12 seconds | |
| Audi A6 and Mazda 626 have the same engine power, but Audi A6 torque is 5 NM more than Mazda 626. Audi A6 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.1 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km | |
|
By specification Audi A6 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626, which means that by driving the Audi A6 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Audi A6 consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1200 km in combined cycle | 1010 km in combined cycle | |
| 1480 km on highway | 1160 km on highway | ||
| 1140 km with real consumption | 1060 km with real consumption | ||
| Audi A6 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: | 580'000 km | 380'000 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 A6 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 2 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf | 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. Mazda 626 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Audi A6 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. | |||
| Mazda 626 1999 2.0 engine: The engine is reliable if you use quality diesel. Turbine life is not very long, however. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.80 m | 4.68 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.52 m | |
|
Audi A6 is larger, but slightly lower. Audi A6 is 12 cm longer than the Mazda 626, 10 cm wider, while the height of Audi A6 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 455 litres | 485 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1677 litres | |
|
Mazda 626 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, This could mean that the Audi A6 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.7 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Audi A6 is 0.9 metres more than that of the Mazda 626, which means Audi A6 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`065 kg | 1`935 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Mazda 626 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Audi A6 has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Mazda 626, so Mazda 626 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.8/10 | 6.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi A6 has
|
Mazda 626 has
| |