Mazda 626 1999 vs SAAB 9-3 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 260 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
| Mazda 626 engine produces 5 HP less power than SAAB 9-3, whereas torque is 30 NM less than SAAB 9-3. Due to the lower power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 6.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.8 l/100km | 6.8 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Mazda 626 consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the SAAB 9-3, which means that by driving the Mazda 626 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 626 consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the SAAB 9-3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 68 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1080 km in combined cycle | 1090 km in combined cycle | |
| 1250 km on highway | 1470 km on highway | ||
| 1100 km with real consumption | 1000 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 323, Mazda Premacy | 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. Mazda 626 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The SAAB 9-3 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 626 1999 2.0 engine: The engine is reliable if you use quality diesel. Turbine life is not very long, however. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.59 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.43 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 626 is 4 cm shorter than the SAAB 9-3, width is practically the same also the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 502 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.1 metres less than that of the SAAB 9-3. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`770 | 1`600 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| SAAB 9-3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 626 has serious deffects in 270 percent more cases than SAAB 9-3, so SAAB 9-3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.2/10 | 7.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
SAAB 9-3 has
| |