Mazda 626 1999 vs Mazda 6 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 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: | 115 HP | 141 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 181 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
Mazda 6 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 626 engine produces 26 HP less power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 11 NM less than Mazda 6. Due to the lower power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.2 | 8.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 8.4 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mazda 626 consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that by driving the Mazda 626 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 626 consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 780 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 790 km with real consumption | 760 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda MX-5, Mazda 5, Mazda CX-5 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Mazda 6 2002 2.0 engine: The engine tends to idle unevenly. Engine problems may also include the thermostat and cooling pump. This engine tends to consume more oil at higher mileages. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.68 m | 4.69 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Mazda 626 is smaller, but higher. Mazda 626 is 1 cm shorter than the Mazda 6, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 626 is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1677 litres | 1712 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Mazda 626 has 35 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 6. The Mazda 6 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 6 (by 35 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`840 | 1`905 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | Mazda 6 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 626 has serious deffects in 55 percent more cases than Mazda 6, so Mazda 6 quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.2/10 | 6.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |