Mazda 626 1991 vs Toyota Camry 2001
| 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 Petrol | 2.4 Petrol | |
| 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: | 117 HP | 152 HP | |
| Torque: | 173 NM | 218 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 9.4 seconds | |
|
Toyota Camry is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 626 engine produces 35 HP less power than Toyota Camry, whereas torque is 45 NM less than Toyota Camry. Due to the lower power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.0 | 8.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.5 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mazda 626 consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Camry, which means that by driving the Mazda 626 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda 626 consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Camry. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 810 km in combined cycle | |
| 700 km with real consumption | 840 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota Camry gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 19 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda MX-6 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Toyota RAV4, Toyota Previa | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota Camry 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 | 4.82 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.50 m | |
|
Mazda 626 is smaller. Mazda 626 is 12 cm shorter than the Toyota Camry, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 626 is 11 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 455 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
747 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.4 metres less than that of the Toyota Camry, which means Mazda 626 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`675 | 1`600 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 600 | 3400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Toyota Camry has
| |