Mazda 626 1997 vs Mazda 3 2013
| 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 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 626 engine produces 5 HP less power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 40 NM less than Mazda 3. Due to the lower power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.9 | 5.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 626 consumes 2.8 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 420 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 626 consumes 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 51 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 1000 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 1180 km on highway | ||
| 800 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.58 m | 4.46 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.45 m | |
| Mazda 626 is 12 cm longer than the Mazda 3, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 626 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 502 litres | 364 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1263 litres | |
|
Mazda 626 has more luggage capacity. Mazda 626 has 138 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.2 metres less than that of the Mazda 3. | |||
| 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`685 | 1`815 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 6800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |