Mazda 626 1998 vs Volkswagen Passat 1997
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 168 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | 13 seconds | |
|
Mazda 626 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 626 engine produces 10 HP less power than Volkswagen Passat, but torque is 2 NM more than Volkswagen Passat. Despite less power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.7 | 9.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.4 l/100km | 10.9 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 626 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Passat, which means that by driving the Mazda 626 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 626 consumes 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Passat. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 670 km in combined cycle | |
| 920 km on highway | 870 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 560 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 626 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 4 years | |
| 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. | |||
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.66 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 shorter than the Volkswagen Passat, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 626 is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1677 litres | no data | |
| 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`800 | 1`940 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Mazda 626 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Passat has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Mazda 626, so Mazda 626 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.2/10 | 7.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Volkswagen Passat has
| |