Mazda 626 1999 vs Kia Shuma 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 HP | 88 HP | |
| Torque: | 178 NM | 135 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 13.8 seconds | |
|
Mazda 626 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 626 engine produces 48 HP more power than Kia Shuma, whereas torque is 43 NM more than Kia Shuma. Thanks to more power Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 4.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.1 | 7.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 9.4 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 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Kia Shuma, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 626 could require 30 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda 626 consumes 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Kia Shuma. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 790 km in combined cycle | 630 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 790 km on highway | ||
| 770 km with real consumption | 530 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 626 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 330'000 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: | 17 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Kia Sephia | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.59 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.42 m | |
| Mazda 626 is 11 cm longer than the Kia Shuma, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 626 is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 502 litres | 328 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 780 litres | |
|
Mazda 626 has more luggage capacity. Mazda 626 has 174 litres more trunk space than the Kia Shuma. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.6 metres more than that of the Kia Shuma, which means Mazda 626 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`685 | 1`600 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Kia Shuma has
| |