Mazda 626 2000 vs Mazda 3 2009
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 185 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 8.2 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 626 engine produces 75 HP less power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 170 NM less than Mazda 3. Due to the lower power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 5.6 | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 626 consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 626 could require 45 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1080 km in combined cycle | 980 km in combined cycle | |
| 1250 km on highway | 1170 km on highway | ||
| Mazda 626 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Mazda 626 2000 2.0 engine: The engine is reliable if you use quality diesel. Turbine life is not very long, however. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.59 m | 4.58 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.47 m | |
| Mazda 626 is 1 cm longer than the Mazda 3, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 626 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 502 litres | 430 litres | |
|
Mazda 626 has more luggage capacity. Mazda 626 has 72 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`500 | 1`955 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 626 has serious deffects in 840 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 3200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |