Mazda 626 1988 vs Opel Omega 1989
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 109 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 165 NM | 170 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.7 seconds | 12.5 seconds | |
| Mazda 626 engine produces 6 HP less power than Opel Omega, whereas torque is 5 NM less than Opel Omega. Despite less power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.7 | 9.2 | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 626 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Omega, which means that by driving the Mazda 626 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| Opel Omega 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) | 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 (Opel Omega) 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 480'000 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 Opel Omega engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Opel Frontera, Opel Calibra | |
| 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 Opel Omega 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: | 4.59 m | 4.77 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Mazda 626 is smaller. Mazda 626 is 18 cm shorter than the Opel Omega, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 626 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 525 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1855 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.9 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`100 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 2200 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Opel Omega has
| |