Honda Accord 2001 vs Mazda 626 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 175 NM | 178 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.1 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
|
Mazda 626 is a more dynamic driving. Honda Accord and Mazda 626 have the same engine power, but Honda Accord torque is 3 NM less than Mazda 626. Honda Accord reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.6 | 8.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.8 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda Accord 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 Honda Accord could require 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda Accord consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 790 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 730 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 626 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: | 440'000 km | 480'000 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 Mazda 626 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 17 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: | 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.60 m | 4.59 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.43 m | |
|
Honda Accord is larger. Honda Accord is 1 cm longer than the Mazda 626, 4 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 502 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda Accord is 1 metres more than that of the Mazda 626, which means Honda Accord can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`685 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Honda Accord has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mazda 626, so Honda Accord quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Mazda 626 has
| |