Mazda 626 1995 vs Mazda 626 1991
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Body: | Sedan | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
| Engines: | 1.8 - 2.0 | 1.8 - 2.5 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 76 - 117 HP | 76 - 167 HP | |
| Torque: | 158 - 173 NM | 157 - 221 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.7 - 14.7 seconds | 8.5 - 14.7 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.8 - 8.3 | 6.8 - 9.6 | |
|
Mazda 626 1995 petrol engines consumes on average 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than Mazda 626 1991. On average, a Mazda 626 1995 with diesel engines consumes about the same amount of fuel per 100 km as a Mazda 626 1991. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.70 m | 4.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.39 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 626 1995 and Mazda 626 1991 are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 452 litres | 455 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 747 litres | |
| Mazda 626 1995 has 3 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 626 1991. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`663 | ~ 1`700 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 600 | 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
| |