Ford Scorpio 1997 vs Mazda 626 1999
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 260 NM | 230 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.4 seconds | 12 seconds | |
| Ford Scorpio engine produces 5 HP more power than Mazda 626, whereas torque is 30 NM more than Mazda 626. Despite the higher power, Ford Scorpio reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.1 | 6.3 | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Ford Scorpio consumes 3.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Scorpio could require 570 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 1010 km in combined cycle | |
| 890 km on highway | 1160 km on highway | ||
| Mazda 626 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Mazda 626) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Ford Scorpio) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
| Mazda 626 1999 2.0 engine: The engine is reliable if you use quality diesel. Turbine life is not very long, however. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.83 m | 4.68 m | |
| Width: | 1.87 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.52 m | |
|
Ford Scorpio is larger, but lower. Ford Scorpio is 15 cm longer than the Mazda 626, 16 cm wider, while the height of Ford Scorpio is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 485 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1677 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Scorpio is 0.4 metres less than that of the Mazda 626, which means Ford Scorpio can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`685 | 1`935 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Mazda 626 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Scorpio has serious deffects in 60 percent more cases than Mazda 626, so Mazda 626 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | no data | 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Mazda 626 has
| |