Mazda 626 1991 vs Mercedes E class 1989
| 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: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.6 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: | 167 HP | 160 HP | |
| Torque: | 221 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.1 seconds | 9 seconds | |
| Mazda 626 engine produces 7 HP more power than Mercedes E class, whereas torque is 1 NM more than Mercedes E class. Despite the higher power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.6 | 10.6 | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 626 consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes E class, which means that by driving the Mazda 626 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 150 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 660 km in combined cycle | |
| Mercedes E class gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Mazda 626) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Mercedes E class) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 630'000 km | 630'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda Xedos 9, Mazda MX-6 | 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.70 m | 4.74 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.43 m | |
| Mazda 626 is 4 cm shorter than the Mercedes E class, 1 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 626 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 455 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
747 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 9.6 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 1.6 metres less than that of the Mercedes E class, which means Mazda 626 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`900 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Mercedes E class has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 626 has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than Mercedes E class, so Mercedes E class quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 2800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Mercedes E klase has
| |