1996 Mazda 626 vs. 2010 Chevrolet Cobalt
To start off, 2010 Chevrolet Cobalt is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Mazda 626. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Mazda 626 would be higher. At 2,198 cc (4 cylinders), 2010 Chevrolet Cobalt is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Chevrolet Cobalt (153 HP @ 6100 RPM) has 64 more horse power than 1996 Mazda 626. (89 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Chevrolet Cobalt should accelerate faster than 1996 Mazda 626. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Chevrolet Cobalt weights approximately 56 kg more than 1996 Mazda 626. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, both vehicles can yield 150 Nm of torque. So under normal driving conditions, the ability to climb up hills and pull heavy equipment should be relatively similar for both vehicles.
Compare all specifications:
| 1996 Mazda 626 | 2010 Chevrolet Cobalt | |
| Make | Mazda | Chevrolet |
| Model | 626 | Cobalt |
| Year Released | 1996 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Station Wagon | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1996 cc | 2198 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 89 HP | 153 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 6100 RPM |
| Torque | 150 Nm | 150 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 4900 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1205 kg | 1261 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4600 mm | 4590 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1730 mm |
