Mazda 626 1992 vs Ford Sierra 1990
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 116 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 180 NM | 171 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | 12.2 seconds | |
|
Ford Sierra is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 626 engine produces 4 HP less power than Ford Sierra, but torque is 9 NM more than Ford Sierra. Due to the lower power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.8 | 7.7 | |
|
The Ford Sierra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 626 consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Sierra, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 626 could require 165 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| Ford Sierra gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Mazda 626) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Ford Sierra) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.59 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.43 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 626 is 8 cm longer than the Ford Sierra, 3 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1315 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.8 metres more than that of the Ford Sierra, which means Mazda 626 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`750 | 1`350 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Mazda 626 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Sierra has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Mazda 626, so Mazda 626 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Ford Sierra has
| |