Mazda 626 1999 vs Volkswagen Passat 1997
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 235 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 12 seconds | |
| Mazda 626 and Volkswagen Passat have the same engine power, but Mazda 626 torque is 5 NM less than Volkswagen Passat. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.3 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.0 l/100km | 6.1 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mazda 626 consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Passat, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 626 could require 120 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda 626 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Passat. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1010 km in combined cycle | 1120 km in combined cycle | |
| 1160 km on highway | 1370 km on highway | ||
| 1060 km with real consumption | 1010 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 560'000 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 Volkswagen Passat engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 323, Mazda Premacy | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Audi A6, Seat Alhambra, Seat Leon | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Passat might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Passat 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. | |||
| Mazda 626 1999 2.0 engine: The engine is reliable if you use quality diesel. Turbine life is not very long, however. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.68 m | 4.67 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.50 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 626 is 1 cm longer than the Volkswagen Passat, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 626 is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 485 litres | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1677 litres | no data | |
| Despite its longer length, Mazda 626 has 10 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Passat. This could mean that the Mazda 626 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.2 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Passat. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`935 | 1`960 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | low | |
| Mazda 626 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Passat has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Mazda 626, so Mazda 626 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.2/10 | 7.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Volkswagen Passat has
| |