Which Mazda 626 Version Should You Buy?
The Mazda 626 version to choose depends on whether you prioritize performance, economy, drivetrain, or lower kerb weight. Across the five generations in the catalogue, dated from 1979 to 2002, the clearest performance choice is the fifth-generation 2.5 MT or 2.5 AT with 167 hp. For measured fuel economy, the fifth-generation 2.0 MT diesel with 101 hp is the standout at 5.4 l/100 km combined.
The Mazda 626 version to choose depends on whether you prioritize performance, economy, drivetrain, or lower kerb weight. Across the five generations in the catalogue, dated from 1979 to 2002, the clearest performance choice is the fifth-generation 2.5 MT or 2.5 AT with 167 hp. For measured fuel economy, the fifth-generation 2.0 MT diesel with 101 hp is the standout at 5.4 l/100 km combined. Drivers seeking AWD must look to selected fourth-generation 2.0 MT and 2.0 AT versions. The earliest generation offers RWD, while later listed versions use FWD apart from those fourth-generation AWD alternatives.
Mazda 626 generations compared
The first generation, dated 1979–1982, is a Coupe with 4 versions. It offers 1.6 MT, 1.6 AT, 2.0 MT, and 2.0 AT choices, all with RWD. Output is 75 hp from the 1597 cc engines or 90 hp from the 1998 cc engines. Manual versions have 5 gears, while the Automatic versions have 3.
The second generation, dated 1982–1987, is also a Coupe and has 24 versions in the catalogue. The displayed specifications cover 1.6 MT, 1.6 AT, 2.0 MT, and 2.0 AT variants. FWD replaces the earlier RWD layout. Listed power runs from 80 hp to 120 hp, and measured kerb weight runs from 970 kg to 1080 kg.
The third generation, dated 1987–1996, remains a Coupe and contains 36 versions. Its displayed choices include 1.8 AT, multiple 2.0 MT and 2.0 AT specifications, plus 2.2 MT and 2.2 AT. Output among these entries ranges from 88 hp to 140 hp. Every displayed version is FWD, with either a 5-speed Manual or a 4-speed Automatic.
The fourth generation, dated 1991–1997, changes to a Sedan and has 28 versions. Its displayed range includes 1.8 MT, 1.8 AT, 2.0 MT, and 2.0 AT specifications. It is the generation to examine if AWD is essential: both 2.0 MT and 2.0 AT are listed with AWD, while FWD versions are also available. Outputs range from 75 hp for the diesel 2.0 MT to 115 hp for the Gasoline 2.0 MT and 2.0 AT alternatives.
The fifth generation, dated 1997–2002, is a Sedan with 22 versions. Its displayed engine range includes 1.8 MT, 2.0 MT, 2.0 AT, 2.5 MT, and 2.5 AT. Power extends from 90 hp to 167 hp, with Gasoline and Diesel choices. Every displayed fifth-generation version is FWD.
Mazda 626 engine specs and drivetrain comparison
Repeated names identify distinct catalogue entries, so power, fuel, or drivetrain is shown where necessary.
| Generation and exact version | Power | Torque | Displacement | Fuel | Cylinders and layout | Boost | Gearbox | Drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First, 1.6 MT | 75 hp | 122 Nm | 1597 cc | not measured | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | RWD |
| First, 1.6 AT | 75 hp | 122 Nm | 1597 cc | not measured | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 3 | RWD |
| First, 2.0 MT | 90 hp | 153 Nm | 1998 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | RWD |
| First, 2.0 AT | 90 hp | 153 Nm | 1998 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 3 | RWD |
| Second, 1.6 MT, 80 hp | 80 hp | 121 Nm | 1587 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Second, 1.6 MT, 82 hp | 82 hp | 120 Nm | 1587 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Second, 2.0 MT, 92 hp | 92 hp | 153 Nm | 1998 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Second, 2.0 MT, 95 hp | 95 hp | 158 Nm | 1998 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Second, 2.0 MT, 101 hp | 101 hp | 156 Nm | 1998 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Second, 2.0 AT, 101 hp | 101 hp | 156 Nm | 1998 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 3 | FWD |
| Second, 2.0 MT, 120 hp | 120 hp | 171 Nm | 1998 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Second, 1.6 MT, 80 hp, 1600 cc | 80 hp | not measured | 1600 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Second, 1.6 AT | 80 hp | not measured | 1600 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | FWD |
| Second, 2.0 MT, 101 hp, 1035 kg | 101 hp | 156 Nm | 1998 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Second, 2.0 AT, 101 hp, 1045 kg | 101 hp | 156 Nm | 1998 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 3 | FWD |
| Second, 2.0 MT, 120 hp, 9.6 s | 120 hp | not measured | 1998 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Third, 2.0 AT, 140 hp | 140 hp | 186 Nm | 1995 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | FWD |
| Third, 2.0 AT, 90 hp | 90 hp | 153 Nm | 1998 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | FWD |
| Third, 2.2 AT | 115 hp | 180 Nm | 2184 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | FWD |
| Third, 2.0 MT, 140 hp | 140 hp | 186 Nm | 1995 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Third, 2.0 MT, 90 hp | 90 hp | 153 Nm | 1998 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Third, 2.0 AT, 107 hp, 2000 cc | 107 hp | not measured | 2000 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | FWD |
| Third, 2.0 MT, 107 hp, 2000 cc | 107 hp | not measured | 2000 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Third, 2.2 MT | 115 hp | 180 Nm | 2184 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Third, 1.8 AT | 88 hp | not measured | 1800 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | FWD |
| Third, 2.0 AT, 140 hp, 60-litre tank | 140 hp | 186 Nm | 1995 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | FWD |
| Third, 2.0 AT, 90 hp, 60-litre tank | 90 hp | 153 Nm | 1998 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | FWD |
| Third, 2.0 AT, 107 hp, 60-litre tank | 107 hp | not measured | 2000 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | FWD |
| Fourth, 1.8 MT, 90 hp | 90 hp | 143 Nm | 1840 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Fourth, 1.8 MT, 105 hp | 105 hp | 155 Nm | 1840 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Fourth, 1.8 AT | 105 hp | 155 Nm | 1840 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | FWD |
| Fourth, 2.0 MT, 115 hp, 71 kW | 115 hp | 170 Nm | 1991 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Fourth, 2.0 AT, AWD, 64-litre tank | 115 hp | 170 Nm | 1991 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | AWD |
| Fourth, 2.0 AT, FWD, 64-litre tank | 115 hp | 170 Nm | 1991 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | FWD |
| Fourth, 2.0 MT, AWD, 64-litre tank | 115 hp | 170 Nm | 1991 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | AWD |
| Fourth, 2.0 MT, 75 hp | 75 hp | 169 Nm | 1998 cc | Diesel | 4, Inline | Compressor | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Fourth, 2.0 AT, AWD, 60-litre tank | 115 hp | 170 Nm | 1991 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | AWD |
| Fourth, 2.0 AT, FWD, 60-litre tank | 115 hp | 170 Nm | 1991 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | FWD |
| Fourth, 2.0 MT, FWD, 60-litre tank | 115 hp | 170 Nm | 1991 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Fourth, 2.0 MT, AWD, 60-litre tank | 115 hp | 170 Nm | 1991 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | AWD |
| Fifth, 1.8 MT, 100 hp, 1190 kg | 100 hp | 152 Nm | 1840 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Fifth, 2.0 MT, 115 hp | 115 hp | 173 Nm | 1991 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Fifth, 2.0 MT, 136 hp | 136 hp | 178 Nm | 1991 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Fifth, 2.0 MT, 110 hp | 110 hp | 220 Nm | 1998 cc | Diesel | 4, Inline | Turbo | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Fifth, 1.8 MT, 90 hp, 1180 kg | 90 hp | 145 Nm | 1840 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Fifth, 2.0 AT, 115 hp | 115 hp | 170 Nm | 1991 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | FWD |
| Fifth, 2.5 AT | 167 hp | 218 Nm | 2497 cc | Gasoline | 6, V-shaped | No | Automatic, 5 | FWD |
| Fifth, 2.5 MT | 167 hp | 218 Nm | 2497 cc | Gasoline | 6, V-shaped | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Fifth, 2.0 MT, 101 hp | 101 hp | 230 Nm | 1998 cc | Diesel | 4, Inline | Turbo | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Fifth, 2.0 AT, 136 hp | 136 hp | 178 Nm | 1991 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | FWD |
| Fifth, 1.8 MT, 90 hp, 1280 kg | 90 hp | 145 Nm | 1840 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
| Fifth, 1.8 MT, 100 hp, 1285 kg | 100 hp | 152 Nm | 1840 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | FWD |
Mazda 626 performance and fuel economy
The fastest measured acceleration belongs to the fifth-generation 2.5 MT and 2.5 AT: both reach 100 km/h in 9.3 seconds. The third-generation 2.0 MT with 140 hp follows at 9.4 seconds, while the fifth-generation 2.0 MT with 136 hp records 9.6 seconds and a 208 km/h top speed. That 208 km/h figure equals the measured maximum of the third-generation 2.0 MT with 140 hp.
Among fifth-generation Gasoline manuals, moving from the 1.8 MT with 90 hp and 1180 kg to the 2.0 MT with 136 hp adds 46 hp and cuts acceleration from 12.6 to 9.6 seconds. The latter is 3.0 seconds quicker and raises top speed from 180 to 208 km/h. Its fuel consumption is not measured, however.
The fifth-generation 2.0 MT diesel with 101 hp records 6.4 l/100 km city, 4.5 l/100 km highway, and 5.4 l/100 km combined. The 2.5 MT records 12.2, 7.1, and 9.5 l/100 km respectively. The diesel therefore uses 4.1 l/100 km less on the combined cycle, while the 2.5 MT supplies 66 hp more and reaches 100 km/h 2.2 seconds sooner.
For an Automatic fifth-generation car, the 2.0 AT with 115 hp records 11.5 l/100 km city, 6.8 highway, and 8.5 combined, with 12.1-second acceleration and a 185 km/h maximum. The 2.5 AT records 13.8, 9.8, and 11.8 l/100 km, while acceleration improves to 9.3 seconds and maximum speed rises to 198 km/h. The extra 52 hp therefore saves 2.8 seconds to 100 km/h but adds 3.3 l/100 km to combined consumption.
Where a performance or consumption field is absent from the supplied specifications, it is not measured; no estimate should be substituted.
Mazda 626 dimensions, weight, clearance, and tank
External length, width, height, and wheel-size figures are not measured in the supplied data. Consequently, no Mazda 626 dimensions or wheel sizes can be compared here.
Measured kerb weights reveal useful differences. In the second generation, the 1.6 MT with 82 hp weighs 970 kg, equal to about 11.8 kg per hp. The 2.0 MT with 120 hp weighs 1080 kg, or 9.0 kg per hp. It adds 110 kg but improves the power-to-weight relationship by about 2.8 kg per hp.
In the fifth generation, the 2.0 MT with 136 hp weighs 1215 kg, about 8.9 kg per hp. The 2.5 MT and 2.5 AT each weigh 1425 kg, about 8.5 kg per hp. They add 210 kg over the 136 hp car but also add 31 hp. The fifth-generation 2.0 MT diesel with 101 hp weighs 1275 kg, or about 12.6 kg per hp.
Fifth-generation gross weights span from 1680 kg for the 1.8 MT with 90 hp and 1180 kg kerb weight to 1850 kg for the 1.8 MT with 100 hp and 1285 kg kerb weight; gross weight for the 2.5 MT is not measured. Ground clearance is either 155 or 160 mm across the displayed fifth-generation entries, and every one has a 64-litre tank.
The first and third generations have 155 mm clearance in the displayed data. Fourth-generation entries have 160 mm. Second-generation clearance is listed at 150 or 165 mm, depending on the version. Tank capacity is either 60 or 64 litres where measured; when absent, it is not measured.
Which Mazda 626 version to buy and why
Choose the fifth-generation 2.0 MT diesel with 101 hp if measured economy matters most. Its 5.4 l/100 km combined figure is the lowest stated consumption in the supplied data, and its 230 Nm is the highest torque figure listed for the model. Its compromise is performance: 11.5 seconds to 100 km/h and 185 km/h.
Choose the fifth-generation 2.0 MT with 136 hp for the strongest measured balance of speed and weight. It delivers 68.3 hp per litre, weighs 1215 kg, reaches 100 km/h in 9.6 seconds, and has a 208 km/h maximum. The third-generation 2.0 MT with 140 hp delivers a slightly higher 70.2 hp per litre and the same 208 km/h maximum, while taking 9.4 seconds to reach 100 km/h.
Choose the fifth-generation 2.5 MT when maximum horsepower is the priority. It has 167 hp and 218 Nm, reaches 100 km/h in 9.3 seconds, and records 9.5 l/100 km combined. The 2.5 AT has identical output, acceleration, maximum speed, and kerb weight, but its combined consumption is 11.8 l/100 km—2.3 l/100 km higher than the 2.5 MT.
Choose a fourth-generation 2.0 MT or 2.0 AT with AWD when drivetrain is the deciding factor. Their Gasoline engines produce 115 hp and 170 Nm from 1991 cc. Acceleration, top speed, consumption, and kerb weight for those AWD entries are not measured, so the data supports a drivetrain choice but not a quantified performance comparison.
Choose the first-generation 2.0 MT if RWD and a Manual gearbox define the brief. It produces 90 hp and 153 Nm from 1998 cc. Its acceleration, top speed, consumption, kerb weight, gross weight, tank capacity, and wheel sizes are not measured.
For the lightest measured Mazda 626 in the catalogue, choose the second-generation 1.6 MT with 82 hp at 970 kg. For the quickest measured car, choose the fifth-generation 2.5 MT or 2.5 AT. For the lowest measured combined consumption, choose the fifth-generation 2.0 MT diesel with 101 hp. Those are the clearest choices because each conclusion rests on a directly measured distinction rather than an unsupported assumption about condition, reliability, availability, or price.