Mazda 626 1997 vs Volkswagen Passat 1985

Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison

 
Mazda 626
1997 - 1999
Volkswagen Passat
1985 - 1988
Body: SedanHatchback
The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area.
Gearbox: Manual/AutomaticManual/Automatic
Engines: 1.8 - 2.01.3 - 2.2

Performance

Power: 90 - 115 HP54 - 136 HP
Torque: 145 - 220 NM100 - 184 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 9.9 - 12.6 seconds9.5 - 25.2 seconds
Select a car version for a more accurate comparison!

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 5.2 - 8.56.0 - 10.3
Mazda 626 petrol engines consumes on average 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than Volkswagen Passat. On average, Mazda 626 equipped with diesel engines consume 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Passat.
This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version!
Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy.

Dimensions

Length: 4.58 m4.42 m
Width: 1.71 m1.71 m
Height: 1.43 m1.38 m
Mazda 626 is 16 cm longer than the Volkswagen Passat, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 626 is 5 cm higher.
Trunk capacity: 502 litresno data
Turning diameter: 10.4 meters11.6 meters
The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 1.2 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Passat, which means Mazda 626 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces.
Gross weight (kg): ~ 1`709~ 1`267
Safety: no datano data
Quality:
above average
no data
Average price (€): 8001800
Pros and Cons: Mazda 626 has
  • lower fuel consumption
  • better manoeuvrability
  • lower price
    Share these results to social networks or e-mail
    Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv