Mazda 626 1995 vs SAAB 9-5 1997
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 117 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 173 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.7 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
SAAB 9-5 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 626 engine produces 33 HP less power than SAAB 9-5, whereas torque is 67 NM less than SAAB 9-5. Due to the lower power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 9.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 9.2 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 626 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 626 consumes 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the SAAB 9-5, which means that by driving the Mazda 626 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 225 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 626 consumes 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the SAAB 9-5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 810 km in combined cycle | |
| 740 km with real consumption | 810 km with real consumption | ||
| SAAB 9-5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 520'000 km | 350'000 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 Mazda 626 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda MX-6 | Used also on SAAB 9-3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. SAAB 9-5 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.70 m | 4.80 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Mazda 626 is smaller. Mazda 626 is 10 cm shorter than the SAAB 9-5, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 626 is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 452 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.2 metres less than that of the SAAB 9-5. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`645 | 1`800 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | SAAB 9-5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 626 has serious deffects in 140 percent more cases than SAAB 9-5, so SAAB 9-5 quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.5/10 | 9.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
SAAB 9-5 has
| |