Mazda 626 1999 vs Audi A4 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 180 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 370 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
|
Audi A4 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 626 engine produces 70 HP less power than Audi A4, whereas torque is 140 NM less than Audi A4. Due to the lower power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.3 | 8.7 | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 626 consumes 2.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Audi A4, which means that by driving the Mazda 626 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 360 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 66 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1010 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 1160 km on highway | 1030 km on highway | ||
| Mazda 626 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) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Audi A4 2001: The vehicle features full-time Quattro IV all-wheel drive with Torsen center differential and electronic traction control that operates at speeds up to 40 km/h and applies brakes to spinning wheels, with the effect of locking the front and rear differential. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 330'000 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 Mazda 626 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 323, Mazda Premacy | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Audi A6, Audi A8 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Audi A4 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 | 4.55 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.43 m | |
| Mazda 626 is 13 cm longer than the Audi A4, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 626 is 9 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 485 litres | 442 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1677 litres | no data | |
|
Mazda 626 has more luggage capacity. Mazda 626 has 43 litres more trunk space than the Audi A4. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 11.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.3 metres less than that of the Audi A4. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`935 | 2`230 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Audi A4 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 626 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Audi A4, so Audi A4 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 1600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.2/10 | 7.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Audi A4 has
| |