Volkswagen Polo 1995 vs Mazda 626 1991
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 60 HP | 117 HP | |
| Torque: | 116 NM | 173 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.9 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
Mazda 626 is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen Polo engine produces 57 HP less power than Mazda 626, whereas torque is 57 NM less than Mazda 626. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Polo reaches 100 km/h speed 4.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.5 | 8.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 8.5 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Polo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Polo consumes 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626, which means that by driving the Volkswagen Polo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 225 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Polo consumes 1.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 650 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 626 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: | 380'000 km | 520'000 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: | 4 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Vento | Used also on Mazda MX-6 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Polo might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.72 m | 4.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.39 m | |
|
Volkswagen Polo is smaller, but slightly higher. Volkswagen Polo is 98 cm shorter than the Mazda 626, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Polo is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 245 litres | 455 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
975 litres | 747 litres | |
| Volkswagen Polo has 210 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 626. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volkswagen Polo (by 228 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.1 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Polo is 0.5 metres less than that of the Mazda 626, which means Volkswagen Polo can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`400 | 1`675 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | 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 Volkswagen Polo, so Mazda 626 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Polo has
|
Mazda 626 has
| |