Mazda 626 1998 vs Mitsubishi Carisma 2001
| Body: | Sedan | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 100 HP | 102 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 NM | 215 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.5 seconds | 11.9 seconds | |
|
Mazda 626 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 626 engine produces 2 HP less power than Mitsubishi Carisma, but torque is 5 NM more than Mitsubishi Carisma. Despite less power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.2 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.0 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 626 consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Carisma, 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 | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1230 km in combined cycle | 1090 km in combined cycle | |
| 1420 km on highway | 1330 km on highway | ||
| 1060 km with real consumption | 1000 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 626 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 323, Mazda Premacy | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volvo V40, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Volvo S40 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Carisma might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Mazda 626 1998 2.0 engine: The engine is reliable if you use quality diesel. Turbine life is not very long, however. Mitsubishi Carisma 2001 1.9 engine: Long-lasting and fuel-efficient engine. Maintaining oil change and maintenance intervals is essential for a long engine life, as poor or untimely oil changes can result in turbine and oil pump damage, followed ... More about Mitsubishi Carisma 2001 1.9 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.58 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.40 m | |
| Mazda 626 is 10 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Carisma, width is practically the same , while the height of Mazda 626 is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 502 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1050 litres | |
|
Mazda 626 has more luggage capacity. Mazda 626 has 72 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Carisma. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`770 | 1`795 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | Mitsubishi Carisma has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 626 has serious deffects in 145 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Carisma, so Mitsubishi Carisma quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.7/10 | 7.9/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Mitsubishi Carisma has
| |