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: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| 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: | 150 HP | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.2 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Mazda 6 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 6 engine produces 50 HP more power than Mazda 626, whereas torque is 160 NM more than Mazda 626. Thanks to more power Mazda 6 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.4 | 5.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.0 l/100km | 6.1 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 6 consumes 0.8 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 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 6 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1400 km in combined cycle | 1230 km in combined cycle | |
| 1630 km on highway | 1420 km on highway | ||
| 1030 km with real consumption | 1040 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 380'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda CX-7 | 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 1999 2.0 engine: The engine is reliable if you use quality diesel. Turbine life is not very long, however. | |||
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): | 2`090 | 1`770 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 6600 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 6 has
|
Mazda 626 has
| |