Mazda 626 1998 vs Ford Scorpio 1997
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Mazda 626 is available with front wheel drive, while Ford Scorpio can be equipped with rear wheel drive. | |||
| Engines: | 1.8 - 2.0 | 2.0 - 2.9 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 - 136 HP | 115 - 207 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 - 220 NM | 167 - 281 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 - 13.5 seconds | 9.2 - 13.4 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 - 9.1 | 8.5 - 12.8 | |
|
Mazda 626 petrol engines consumes on average 2.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than Ford Scorpio. On average, Mazda 626 equipped with diesel engines consume 3.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Scorpio. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.66 m | 4.83 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.87 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Mazda 626 is smaller, but higher. Mazda 626 is 17 cm shorter than the Ford Scorpio, 16 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 626 is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1677 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.4 metres more than that of the Ford Scorpio, which means Mazda 626 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`844 | ~ 1`726 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 600 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
| |