Mazda 626 1991 vs Toyota Carina E 1992
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 117 HP | 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 173 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 11.3 seconds | |
|
Mazda 626 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 626 engine produces 1 HP more power than Toyota Carina E, whereas torque is 28 NM more than Toyota Carina E. Thanks to more power Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.0 | 7.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.5 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Carina E is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 626 consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Carina E, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 626 could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 626 consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Carina E. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 700 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota Carina E gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda MX-6 | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Corolla, Toyota Celica | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota Carina E might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mazda 626 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.70 m | 4.53 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.41 m | |
|
Mazda 626 is larger, but slightly lower. Mazda 626 is 17 cm longer than the Toyota Carina E, 5 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 626 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 455 litres | 470 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
747 litres | 1250 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Mazda 626 has 15 litres less trunk space than the Toyota Carina E. This could mean that the Mazda 626 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Toyota Carina E (by 503 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.4 metres more than that of the Toyota Carina E, which means Mazda 626 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`675 | 1`600 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Toyota Carina E has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 626 has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Toyota Carina E, so Toyota Carina E quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Toyota Carina E has
| |