Mazda 323F

Which Mazda 323F Version Should You Buy?

Choosing a Mazda 323F starts with deciding what matters most: performance, fuel consumption, transmission, drive system, or body style. The catalogue covers four production entries from September 1989 to September 2003: two Liftback generations followed by the Estate 5-door sixth generation and its restyling.

Choosing a Mazda 323F starts with deciding what matters most: performance, fuel consumption, transmission, drive system, or body style. The catalogue covers four production entries from September 1989 to September 2003: two Liftback generations followed by the Estate 5-door sixth generation and its restyling. The range spans Gasoline and Diesel engines from 1323 to 1998 cc, outputs from 71 to 144 hp, and kerb weights from 990 to 1210 kg. Most versions are FWD, while the first-generation 1.8 MT with 103 hp is the sole AWD option. For outright speed, the second-generation 2.0i MT and 2.0i AT lead with 144 hp and 213 km/h; for the lowest measured combined consumption, the restyled 2.0TD MT records 5.9 l/100 km.

Mazda 323F generations: what changed?

The first generation was produced from September 1989 through March 1994 as a Liftback, with six listed versions. Its range consists of 1597 cc and 1839 cc Gasoline engines, with 4-cylinder Inline layouts throughout. Outputs run from 84 to 128 hp. Five-speed Manual and four-speed Automatic transmissions were offered, and the unusual choice here is the 103 hp 1.8 MT with AWD. Kerb weight is 990 kg for the 1.6 versions and 1120 kg for both 1.8 MT versions.

The second generation ran from October 1996 through May 1998, also as a Liftback, and has six versions. Engine capacity stretches from 1489 to 1998 cc, while power ranges from 72 to 144 hp. This is the only generation in the supplied catalogue with 6-cylinder V-shaped versions: the 2.0i MT and 2.0i AT, both producing 144 hp and 180 Nm. Every listed version is FWD. A 2.0D MT provides the Diesel alternative, while the other five versions use Gasoline.

The sixth generation was available from September 1998 through April 2000 as an Estate 5-door, with seven versions. Its catalogue range includes 1323, 1489, 1839, and 1998 cc engines. Outputs span 71 to 114 hp, and all versions are FWD. The 90 hp 2.0D MT adds Turbo boost, whereas the 71 hp 2.0D MT has no listed boost. Gasoline buyers can choose Manual or Automatic with the 1.5i and 1.8i engines.

The sixth-generation restyling ran from May 2000 through September 2003 and remained an Estate 5-door. Its six versions use 1323, 1598, 1991, or 1998 cc engines. Compared with the preceding sixth-generation range, the 1489 cc 1.5i versions were replaced by 1598 cc 1.6i versions, while the naturally aspirated and Turbo 2.0D choices gave way to a single 101 hp 2.0TD MT with Turbo boost. All six restyled versions are FWD.

Mazda 323F engine specs

Every version name below is preserved exactly as listed. Repeated names are distinguished by output.

Power per litre helps separate engines that merely have more capacity from those that extract more output. The first-generation 128 hp 1.8 MT produces about 69.6 hp per litre, compared with about 56.0 hp per litre for the 103 hp 1.8 MT. The second-generation 144 hp 2.0i MT and 2.0i AT reach about 72.2 hp per litre, the highest result in this catalogue. The restyled 130 hp 2.0i MT and 2.0i AT produce about 65.3 hp per litre.

Mazda 323F performance, fuel consumption and mpg

The quickest measured acceleration belongs to the first-generation 103 hp 1.8 MT: its 8.2-second time is 0.3 seconds quicker than either second-generation 144 hp 2.0i. The 128 hp first-generation 1.8 MT has 25 hp more than the AWD 1.8 MT, yet its listed acceleration is 1 second slower and its consumption is 3.8 l/100 km higher. Those figures make the 103 hp AWD version the stronger performance proposition within that first-generation pair, while the 128 hp FWD version offers a 6 km/h higher maximum speed.

For measured economy, the restyled 2.0TD MT uses 5.9 l/100 km, which is 1 l/100 km less than the restyled 2.0i MT and 2.0i AT. No MPG figure is supplied, so MPG is not measured; the catalogue provides combined consumption only in l/100 km. City and highway consumption are also not measured for every version.

Mazda 323F dimensions, weight and capacity

Exterior length, width, height, wheelbase, and wheel sizes are not measured for any listed Mazda 323F version. Gross weight is also not measured throughout the range. The available comparison therefore rests on kerb weight, ground clearance, and fuel-tank capacity.

Weight per horsepower highlights the performance burden each engine carries. The first-generation 84 hp 1.6 versions have about 11.8 kg per hp, while the 128 hp 1.8 MT improves that to about 8.8 kg per hp. The second-generation 144 hp 2.0i versions achieve about 8.4 kg per hp, the strongest ratio in the supplied catalogue. The restyled 130 hp 2.0i versions return about 9.1 kg per hp. At the economy-oriented end, the restyled 101 hp 2.0TD MT carries about 11.8 kg per hp.

Which Mazda 323F version should you choose?

Choose the second-generation 2.0i MT if maximum performance is the priority. It combines the catalogue’s highest output of 144 hp, highest top speed of 213 km/h, and best weight-to-power figure of about 8.4 kg per hp. The 2.0i AT posts the same power, torque, acceleration, maximum speed, consumption, and kerb weight, so the decision between them is specifically five-speed Manual versus four-speed Automatic.

Choose the first-generation 103 hp 1.8 MT if AWD matters. It is the only AWD Mazda 323F listed, and it also has the fastest measured 0–100 km/h time at 8.2 seconds. Against the 128 hp FWD 1.8 MT, it gives up 25 hp and 6 km/h in top speed but uses 3.8 l/100 km less combined fuel and reaches 100 km/h 1 second sooner.

Choose the restyled 2.0i MT or 2.0i AT for the strongest Estate 5-door Gasoline specification. Both deliver 130 hp, 171 Nm, 9.7-second acceleration, 203 km/h, and 6.9 l/100 km. They have 16 hp less than the earlier Liftback 2.0i versions, but their measured combined consumption is 1.6 l/100 km lower. Once again, the listed performance is identical, leaving the transmission as the key distinction.

Choose the restyled 2.0TD MT when measured fuel consumption is the deciding factor. Its 5.9 l/100 km is the lowest recorded figure, while 220 Nm equals the highest torque offered by any listed version. Compared with the sixth-generation 90 hp 2.0D MT, it adds 11 hp and 9 km/h while matching its 12.2-second acceleration; combined consumption for the earlier version is not measured.

For a smaller Gasoline engine, the restyled 95 hp 1.6i MT is a more performance-focused choice than the preceding 88 hp 1.5i MT. It adds 7 hp and 13 Nm, cuts the measured acceleration time by 0.3 seconds, and raises top speed by 7 km/h, though combined consumption increases by 0.2 l/100 km. The 1.6i AT gives the same power and performance but consumes another 0.2 l/100 km.

Finally, choose the 72 hp 1.3i MT only if its smallest listed Gasoline capacity is the attraction. Both sixth-generation forms share 1323 cc, 108 Nm, 14.2-second acceleration, 167 km/h, and 7.4 l/100 km. On the supplied numbers, the restyling changes neither its performance nor its consumption, although the later entry adds a measured 55 l tank and 160 mm ground clearance where those figures for the earlier car are not measured.