2009 Mercury Sable vs 2002 Mazda 626
📊 Key Differences
- Fuel economy: 21 MPG vs 25 MPG combined — Mazda 626 is more efficient
- Annual fuel cost: $2850 vs $2400 — Mazda 626 saves $ per year
- Fuel type: Regular Gasoline vs Regular Gasoline
| Specification | 2009 Mercury Sable | 2002 Mazda 626 |
|---|---|---|
| Year | 2009 | 2002 |
| Class | Large Cars | Midsize Cars |
| Fuel Type | Regular Gasoline | Regular Gasoline |
| Drive | Front-Wheel Drive | Front-Wheel Drive |
| Transmission | Automatic 6-spd | Manual 5-spd |
| Cylinders | 6 | 4 |
| Displacement (L) | 3.5 | 2.0 |
| City MPG | 18 | 23 |
| Highway MPG | 28 | 29 |
| Combined MPG | 21 | 25 |
| Annual Fuel Cost | $2850 | $2400 |
| CO₂ (g/mile) | 423.1904761904762 | 355.48 |
🚗 2009 Mercury Sable
Large Cars with 21 MPG combined fuel economy. Runs on Regular Gasoline. Front-Wheel Drive drivetrain.
Full Mercury Sable Profile →🚗 2002 Mazda 626
Midsize Cars with 25 MPG combined fuel economy. Runs on Regular Gasoline. Front-Wheel Drive drivetrain.
Full Mazda 626 Profile →🔗 Related