Mazda 6 2013 vs Mazda 626 1999
| Body: | Estate car / wagon | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The wagon generally has more cargo space due to a larger trunk door opening, a roof that extends as far back as possible, and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into cargo space. Sedans tend to be quieter than wagons due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 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: | 165 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 170 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.1 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
Mazda 6 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 6 engine produces 50 HP more power than Mazda 626, whereas torque is 40 NM more than Mazda 626. Thanks to more power Mazda 6 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 7.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.2 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 6 consumes 1.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626, which means that by driving the Mazda 6 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 285 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 6 consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1030 km in combined cycle | 810 km in combined cycle | |
| 1240 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| 860 km with real consumption | 790 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 20 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda MX-5, Mazda CX-5, Mazda CX-3 | 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: | yes | no | |
| The Mazda 6 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 6 2013 2.0 engine: This engine is not well-suited for low-quality fuel, as it quickly clogs the fuel system. The use of substandard fuel often leads to the failure of expensive ignition coils, resulting in significant repair ... More about Mazda 6 2013 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.80 m | 4.59 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.43 m | |
|
Mazda 6 is larger. Mazda 6 is 21 cm longer than the Mazda 626, 13 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 6 is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 502 litres | 502 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 6 is 1.4 metres more than that of the Mazda 626, which means Mazda 6 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`990 | 1`685 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 6600 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 6 has
|
Mazda 626 has
| |