Ford Mondeo 2000 vs Mazda 626 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 178 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
|
Mazda 626 is a more dynamic driving. Ford Mondeo engine produces 11 HP less power than Mazda 626, whereas torque is 8 NM less than Mazda 626. Due to the lower power, Ford Mondeo reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 8.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
| By specification Ford Mondeo consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626, which means that by driving the Ford Mondeo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 790 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 770 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 | 480'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 17 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Ford Focus | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mazda 626 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. | |||
| Ford Mondeo 2000 1.8 engine: The Ford CHBA/CHBB, also known as the 1.8 Duratec HE, is a naturally aspirated four-cylinder gasoline engine introduced in 2000 and developed with Mazda’s involvement. It uses an aluminum cylinder block and aluminum 16-valve cylinder head with two camshafts, multipoint fuel injection, and a timing chain drive. With ... More about Ford Mondeo 2000 1.8 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.73 m | 4.59 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.43 m | |
|
Ford Mondeo is larger. Ford Mondeo is 14 cm longer than the Mazda 626, 10 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 500 litres | 502 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1370 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Mondeo is 0.7 metres more than that of the Mazda 626, which means Ford Mondeo can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`875 kg | 1`685 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`384 kg | 1`250 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 491 kg | 435 kg | |
| Ford Mondeo load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 11 procentiem more than Mazda 626. Therefore, Ford Mondeo is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Mazda 626 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Ford Mondeo, so Mazda 626 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.5/10 | 6.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Mondeo has
|
Mazda 626 has
| |