Mitsubishi Carisma 1997 vs Mazda 626 1997
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 174 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 12.6 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Carisma is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Carisma engine produces 35 HP more power than Mazda 626, whereas torque is 29 NM more than Mazda 626. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Carisma reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 7.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Carisma is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Carisma consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Carisma over 15,000 km in a year you can save 135 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Carisma consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 890 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 1110 km on highway | 1030 km on highway | ||
| 810 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Carisma gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 560'000 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: | 23 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volvo V40, Volvo S40, Mitsubishi Galant | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 323, Mazda Premacy | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mitsubishi Carisma 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: | 4.48 m | 4.58 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.43 m | |
| Mitsubishi Carisma is 10 cm shorter than the Mazda 626, width is practically the same , while the height of Mitsubishi Carisma is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 502 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
660 litres | no data | |
|
Mazda 626 has more luggage space. Mitsubishi Carisma has 72 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 626. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`685 | 1`680 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Mazda 626 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mitsubishi Carisma, so Mazda 626 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.9/10 | 6.7/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Carisma has
|
Mazda 626 has
| |