Hyundai Lantra 1999 vs Mazda 626 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 114 HP | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 152 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Hyundai Lantra is more dynamic to drive. Hyundai Lantra engine produces 14 HP more power than Mazda 626, but torque is 7 NM less than Mazda 626. Thanks to more power Hyundai Lantra reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 8.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Hyundai Lantra consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626, which means that by driving the Hyundai Lantra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Hyundai Lantra consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 910 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 630 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 626 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 560'000 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: | 6 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Hyundai Coupe | 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 Hyundai Lantra 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: | 4.45 m | 4.68 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.52 m | |
|
Hyundai Lantra is smaller. Hyundai Lantra is 23 cm shorter than the Mazda 626, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Hyundai Lantra is 12 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 485 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1677 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Hyundai Lantra is 0.3 metres less than that of the Mazda 626. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`200 | 1`840 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Mazda 626 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Hyundai Lantra has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Mazda 626, so Mazda 626 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | no data | 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Hyundai Lantra has
|
Mazda 626 has
| |