Mazda 626 1999 vs Toyota Corolla 2004
| Body: | Hatchback | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 215 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 12.6 seconds | |
|
Mazda 626 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 626 engine produces 20 HP more power than Toyota Corolla, whereas torque is 15 NM more than Toyota Corolla. Thanks to more power Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 5.7 | |
| Mazda 626 consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Corolla, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 626 could require 30 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1080 km in combined cycle | 960 km in combined cycle | |
| 1250 km on highway | 1140 km on highway | ||
| Mazda 626 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 280'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mazda 626 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 323, Mazda Premacy | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota RAV4, Toyota Corolla Verso | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota Corolla might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Mazda 626 1999 2.0 engine: The engine is reliable if you use quality diesel. Turbine life is not very long, however. Toyota Corolla 2004 2.0 engine: The engine was known for its solid technical characteristics. One of its drawbacks is the lack of hydraulic lifters, requiring periodic valve clearance adjustments. The next-generation 1AD-FTV engine was equipped with ... More about Toyota Corolla 2004 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.59 m | 4.41 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.47 m | |
| Mazda 626 is 18 cm longer than the Toyota Corolla, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 626 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 502 litres | 437 litres | |
|
Mazda 626 has more luggage capacity. Mazda 626 has 65 litres more trunk space than the Toyota Corolla. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.2 metres more than that of the Toyota Corolla. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`770 | 1`760 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Toyota Corolla has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 626 has serious deffects in 155 percent more cases than Toyota Corolla, so Toyota Corolla quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 2400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.2/10 | 8.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Toyota Corolla has
| |