Volvo V70 1997 vs Mazda 626 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 290 NM | 230 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Volvo V70 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo V70 engine produces 30 HP more power than Mazda 626, whereas torque is 60 NM more than Mazda 626. Thanks to more power Volvo V70 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 6.3 | |
| Volvo V70 consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 626, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo V70 could require 45 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1060 km in combined cycle | 1010 km in combined cycle | |
| 1340 km on highway | 1160 km on highway | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 380'000 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 Volvo V70 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volvo S80, Volvo 850, Volvo S70 | 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. Volvo V70 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Volvo V70 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. | |||
| Mazda 626 1999 2.0 engine: The engine is reliable if you use quality diesel. Turbine life is not very long, however. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.72 m | 4.68 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.52 m | |
|
Volvo V70 is larger, but lower. Volvo V70 is 4 cm longer than the Mazda 626, 5 cm wider, while the height of Volvo V70 is 11 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 420 litres | 485 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1580 litres | 1677 litres | |
|
Mazda 626 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Volvo V70 has 65 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 626. This could mean that the Volvo V70 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 626 (by 97 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo V70 is 0.6 metres less than that of the Mazda 626, which means Volvo V70 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`935 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | average | |
| Mazda 626 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo V70 has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Mazda 626, so Mazda 626 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.1/10 | 6.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V70 has
|
Mazda 626 has
| |