Mazda 626 1999 vs Mazda 6 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 310 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 11.1 seconds | |
|
Mazda 6 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 626 engine produces 10 HP less power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 80 NM less than Mazda 6. Due to the lower power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.3 | 6.6 | |
| 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. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1010 km in combined cycle | 960 km in combined cycle | |
| 1160 km on highway | 1120 km on highway | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 370'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 3 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 323, Mazda Premacy | Used also on Mazda MPV | |
| 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. | |||
| 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 | 4.69 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: | 485 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1677 litres | 1712 litres | |
| Mazda 626 has 20 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 6. 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`935 | 2`010 | |
| 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
| |